Email
PrintComments
Torn about this one...
On the one hand – I am old enough to remember the first time Nellie left. Prior to him leaving was the great RUN TMC days – memories of which lead to Mullin being my fav all time warrior. When Nellie left, we had a whole strong of coaches cutting their teeth on the dubs and then moving on. All the while we didn’t make the playoffs. Then Nellie came back and we got WE BELIEVE. In addition, nobody out there really excites me, and I wonder if better names may be available in a year.
On the other hand – Nellie is not easy to back up. He prefers to be gimmicky than traditional, he seems content with us being a 40 win team. He also seems to have a strained relationship with Monta (not as bad as AR or Harrington had) and I think Monta needs a younger coach who can give him some tough love he’ll respond to. Plus, lame duck coaches rarely win over the players – although with this group of players I think more respect will be given.
My main criteria is about what will give us the best shot for the playoff this season. I know its a stretch but in terms of luring Carmelo or other big names, we need to show the world we all legit. Reading that some players want Nellie to stay says a lot.
Given all this, I say we keep him.
He seems content being a 40 win team
when half your team is injured and you got D-leaguers starting and playing 40+ mins.
Come on guys he’s realistic. You really think if he had the Lakers roster he would be content with winning 40 games?
Strained relationship with Monta? Did you miss the countless times he praised Ellis last year. He said he should make the all star team, that he can’t take him off the court cuz he so important, that he carries such a big load, etc.
my comment is based not on last year
It’s based on his entire career. He did as good a job as was likely possible with last year’s team, when he was into it, and I don’t think other coaches could have reached much better a record. But as someone who has followed his career since the 80s I’d argue that his style of coaching (focus on mismatches, small ball, etc,) leads to .500 ball.
As for Monta, it isn’t really about Nellie, I just think Monta needs a tough love type of coach who Monta respects and will listen to if he is going to get better as a player. I think a Doc Rivers type could get more out of monta than nellie can.
But as someone who has followed his career since the 80s I’d argue that his style of coaching (focus on mismatches, small ball, etc,) leads to .500 ball.
Did you stop following him when he was coaching Dallas?
by Evanz on Aug 2, 2010 5:34 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
not at all
however, he had far more talent on that team, plus it was talent that suited with his system. Dirk was the perfect example.
A great coach is one who looks at the talent and skills of the players and builds the offense and defense around that, while still finding ways to instill their philosophy. A good coach (like Nellie) is one that tries to fit the players into a system regardless of the talent and skill set of the players but at times (Dallas) finds ways to make this work extremely well.
he got the Warriors to the playoffs just two years ago with better talent
this upcoming season, he will also have better talent, and a guard (Curry) and forward (Lee) that should do well in a Nellie style. He’s clearly not our long-term solution anymore, and I agree with you he’s not a “great” coach, but I think he can get this team to the playoffs.
Prior to him leaving was the great RUN TMC days
Run TMC was fun, but great?
Quick! without looking, how many years was the Run TMC era? How many wins did they have in those years? If you guessed two years with totals of 44 and 37 wins (yes, they got worse in year two of “Run TMC”) then you get 1000 mythological trivia points. If one winning season out of two, with that season being only marginally better than .500 is great, well, then your standards for great aren’t all that high.
by jae on Aug 5, 2010 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Stick with Nellie for the season and the Dubs have a reasonably good shot at the 2011 NBA Playoffs.
If they stay healthy probably true with a quick exit.
The big argument for nellie is he’s still got a year left on his contract and he’s familiar with the returning players so he’d have a head start building the new team. I’m not a nellie fan but I can’t see anyone else coming in and doing better than him for one year. I can wait to start a “new era” till we find a really good coach. Of course if we can lure over Doc Rivers then I’d can Nellie tomorrow. This is still gonna be a mediocre team till we find a quality SF and true center so I don’t see anything wrong with letting Nellie run out his deal while we evaluate what we got and hopefully the new management learns how to build a team? By the end of next season we’ll know if Dre is recovered, if Montay and Stef can really play a full season together effectively, and if any of our new guys were good moves, next year we can build from there with some confidence of success.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 1, 2010 9:24 PM PDT reply actions
Keep Nellie
Fix the front office first.
You have the luxury of keeping Nellie until you find the perfect coaching candidate. Take that time. And give Nellie a shot at going out in style.
Not adverse to Kieth Smart, actually warm to the idea, but pick you GM, etc.. and then make the decision.
Lame ducks not successful? how many lame ducks are the winning-est coach in history?
I agree
I think Nellie deserves a final shot at it.
He did pretty good with a healthy talented team his first years.
Now that he has some depth, he should have chance of at least having more options on his couching abilities. We all know he wants to add more wins for the record he holds.
lol couching abilities...
with a cold brewski and all! jk i knew you meant coaching* but either way it both make sense :D
by Jiriest Welsch on Aug 1, 2010 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Strange that the article talks about a limited candidate pool and then mentions ...
…. how two of the most logical choices who fit the mold Lacob said he wanted, and how they’re both still available.
Shaw and Jackson both fit the mold of what Lacob says he wants. The future starts now. Waiting is dumb.
Minny 2.0
"It's like Will Smith, remember the Fresh Prince? Get the ball don't let nobody else shoot? That's kinda what the offense can be sometimes, and they're just standing around waiting for Monta to make a play"
-MT2
by golden_solitude on Aug 1, 2010 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Shaw and Jackson both fit the mold of what Lacob says he wants.
Can you honestly recommend Mark Jackson for any head coaching job? He might be Isaih 2.0 with his worship of PPG, and flashy plays.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 2, 2010 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions
I fail to understand
why we should keep a coach who produces losing seasons as regularly as Nellie. The argument about player familiarity is bogus – who, precisely, are we talking about? DLee, Udoh, and Dwright have none, Steph and Reggie have one year. AB and Monta? Um…. not sure either would argue against a change, yanno? Looking at the personnel on this roster, it’s easy to make the argument that any coach who will do less long-term damage is a better choice than Nellie.
Shaw appears to fit the bill, all the way around. He would give the New Warriors a coaching pedigree out of LA and Chicago, to match the ownership pedigree out of Boston. Five rings (3 playing, 2 coaching) and five years coaching with Jackson is more than pretty good cred.
I’d take him yesterday, but mebbe that’s just me.
Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.
If we want to start a winning tradition
Shouldn’t we bring in a proven winner?
Shaw has never been a head coach and as I said earlier – we spent the entire late 80s and all the 90s bringing in first time coaches who failed, moved on, and some succeeded elsewhere. Shaw has said he wants to coach the triangle and we don’t have the right type of players for that (especially at the 2 spot). Maybe he’d adjust to the talent he has – but we don’t know that and he has no experience doing so. Shaw may be a good coach but he is unproven.
If Nellie can help us contend for a playoff spot, then we’d be building chemistry on this team and get some rep around the league. Then, in the off season we bring in a proven winner for a head coach to help us get over the hump and back in the playoffs next year.
Shaw has said he wants to coach the triangle and we don’t have the right type of players for that (especially at the 2 spot).
Really??
We have a lot of of combo players who aren’t natural PGs. I think a triangle could work with Curry and Monta and Reggie Williams and co.
People think triangle is about running offense thru a SG or SF, it’s not really it’s about all 3 perimeter players being interchangeable in initiating offense, which could work on a team without a natural PG. A team with a player like Chris Paul, is one I’d NEVER want to run a triangle with
the same might be said of Curry
Nash as well. When you have a premiere PG, which I think Curry has the tools to be, then running a triangle offense is a waste of that player’s talents. No triangle style team has also had one of the league’s top 5 pgs for a reason. If we are building around Curry in terms of players, we should do the same with coaches. We need a coach who can facilitate Curry’s growth into becoming the star he can be. I worry that the triangle offense would limit that possibility.
As for the 2 and 3 spot, you need players with a high bballl IQ, and I don’t think we have that with Monta and cannot say either way with Wright yet.
But taking a step back...
Isn’t trinagle about putting ball in hands of your best player and more or less all your perimter players are equal. The idea was to run offense thru jordan and pippen in chicago instead of Kerr cause they were better not cause they were SG/SFs. From all I’ve read and heard Tex winters and Phil Jackson say, Triangle values all 3 perimeter players the same and you can run offense thru any of them. So why not Curry?
I see your ponit on bball IQ, I’m just saying I DON’T think he’s a pure PG or a 10+ assist per game PG. I think his best asset is his shooting scoring ability and his playmaking comes off of that, not visa versa like CP3 or Kidd or true PGs. Curry if he wanted to, could be a 25 to 30 point per game scorer cause he’s just that deadly a shooter.
So why can’t triangle for for him?
It’s more a question than a statement. I don’t think it’s worst system for a skilled, smart player like Curry. Perhaps Monta + others aren’t best fit. For me, Iguodala would be dream, and then third perimeter player would be more a defensive role player who could hit open shots. but why wouldn’t that trio play an excellent triangle offense.
I hope Shaw would at least try a modified offense.
See how it goes with it, but mix in the PnR since we’ve got great players to run it. Also keep running.
As long as it’s not what Minnesota was thinking last year.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
Yes but look at minnota's talent
They were going to suck no matter what system they ran
"Proven winners" are hard to find and rarely available.
Truth is, most coaches don’t make that much difference one way or the other.
If Shaw has said he wants to run the triangle – does anybody have a source for that? – that makes him a bad choice for our team. So go for Jackson.
But beyond that, honestly, I’d rather have a first-time coach than a retread, because with the retreads you know what you’re getting – and it’s not “proven winners.”
Care to explain why triangle is a bad fit for this team?
We have bigs who are very good passers, and most of our perimeter players are good but not great passers. A motion offense based on cutting, movement and team passing might fit better.
Maybe thats too general a way at looking at it, but I don’t get all the hatred towards the system. As much as I love Curry, he’s not a natural PG (in sense of jason kidd, chris paul, steve nash etc), and the pressure of being one, I don’t think maximizes his best skills which is scoring/shooting.
There was comment elsewhere about great vs good coaches – to which I’d add good coaches have a good system or adjust their system to their best players, great coaches do both. Jackson has done so, so has Nelson although he hasn’t had Jordan, Pippen, Shaq, Kobe etc to work with very often (when he had a Moncrief or Dirk, he was very successful but beaten by better teams in the playoffs).
Obviously no offense is better than its execution – who’s running it and how well it’s run means more than its design. The triangle as run in Chi with the “three-headed center” and Grant along side Jordan & Pippen is a little different than how Jackson is running it in LA with Gasol & Odom with KB. So, if we hired Shaw and he adjusted the offense to the talent available (until he can get the talent he ideally preferred) it could work well enough when we run half court sets. Curry probably would be good in the triangle. My concerns are does Shaw have the requisite experience to make that adjustment and would the triangle better fit our current personnel? Maybe to the first, probably not to the second.
We all know Nelson has countered not having a low post scorer by trying to push tempo and allow his smalls to attack the basket before bigger defenders get back and settle in on defense. Monta would seem to be less likely to thrive in the triangle than in Nelson’s system, and running the triangle would seem to take away whatever percentage of advantage we can squeek out of our bigs’ ability to run the floor while expose their deficiencies as low post scorers.
Despite the limitations of our players in the half court, we still score more than most teams by running. Our problems are on the other side – and hopefully by playing Lee against PF rather than C he won’t be such a liability there, DWright will hopefully help there, and we’ll rebound more effectively.
Back to offense: With our current roster, factoring DWright into the likely 8man rotation as it stands now, it would seem that the uptempo system still fits our personnel better than the triangle. Could that change by trading Monta & Andris for a Gasol-type post? Absolutely, but until then …
And as for the coaching position, good arguments can be made to keep Nelson and also to let Smart have a year to show his potential. I have been a proponent of letting Nelson sail off into the Pacific, but with the sale, roster, and contract status it’s perfectly reasonable he’d at least start the season on the bench and if we have a chance to do something in the playoffs he’d probably finish, if not Smart may step in somewhere along the line …
by hardcore on Aug 2, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
My concerns are does Shaw have the requisite experience to make that adjustment and would the triangle better fit our current personnel?
One thing I know about Shaw is he’s regarded as a great speaker, motivator, leader. he was as a player, similar to Avery Johnson. And he has garnered same respect in La. While this doesn’t overcome tactical inadequacies, I’ve always been of belief you can have Xs&Os assistants, head coach must have complete respect of team. Doc rivers in Boston would be best example, as I think most people recognize, Thibenou is the real defensive ‘genius’ there.
Shaw has got the personality to do it, and really outside of Nellie (and more in his early stint) Warriors haven’t had any other coaches capable of this.
Maybe to the first, probably not to the second.
My question had to do more with personnel. I don’t see any reason to not play uptempo with triangle. Most people will agree Lakers were a more uptempo team in 2007 to 2009. They got up and down well, scored a lot. Like you said it had more to do with personnel. As Kobe aged, Gasol aged, Odom aged, Ariza left they slowed the tempo a bit.
Glad you asked:
The triange isn’t just bad for this team. It’s bad for basketball. The state of the game sucks right now. It’s boring boring BORING! All hoops fans should be rooting for some team, any team, to bring action back to the sport by winning the championship with an exciting style. I certainly understand that Nellie has very little time left. But someone needs to put an end to the boredom that started, I guess, with Chuck Daly’s Pistons and has gotten increasingly worse. Those who say boring-ball is the only way to win are ignoring the showtime Lakers, Bird’s Celtics, Dr. J’s Sixers and many other great squads from before the darkness fell. I understand that GSW fans want to win, as they should. But I want to win in a way that doesn’t put people to sleep. The triangle is the problem, not the solution.
by geraldmcgrew on Aug 2, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
The state of the game sucks right now.
You musta had it on the wrong channel watching the playoffs and the finals?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 2, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, with the most sweeps ever!
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 2, 2010 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Gome 7 of the finals was boring crap
and a lousy presentation of the sport. Look, different strokes and all that, but if that’s what you like, then you must love spectator chess.
if that’s what you like, then you must love spectator chess.
No, I like to see two well balanced teams put up tough all around efforts, running up and down and dunking on fast breaks is boring, I’d rather see a balanced game of strategy and ball movement versus lock down defenses.
Yo, Say Queensbridge.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 3, 2010 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Agreed, but
the Lakers-Celtics series of the ‘80s were much closer to the balance you’re describing, hence my view of the game’s current state.
Interesting Comment
And I can’t disagree. I don’t find triangle as bad as those systems you say but it’s a good point. Rec’d
If the source is to be believed that certain players want Nellie to stay, it has to be Monta, Steph, or Andris (or some combination). There are no other players left (except Reggie, and I guess it would make sense for him to want Nellie). Of course, you can’t let players determine who the coach is, but the fact that they do want him around is a strong point in his favor.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Aug 2, 2010 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
See, I think Nellie is far more likely to destroy chemistry.
Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.
by Rasputin10 on Aug 2, 2010 6:47 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Keep Nelly
If Lacob knows how to run a business, he’ll keep the all time most winningest coach for his last season. Then make a decision. No need to rush things if he’s in it for the long run.
I think a key point is
You don’t fire Nellie without a clear list of alternatives. Seen it with other teams and sports. The most obvious example is when the Niners let Marrucci go.
I love Nellie, but at same time I see Lacob’s point and I have to agree, sooner a new long term coach comes in, the sooner team will turn corner. It will take time, the key point is making sure you got right guy. Not just a new coach for new coach’s sake
Keep Nellie, grab a new GM first and figure out the basketball stuff with the GM
I hear Kevin Pritchard is still available…
He has been turning down gigs
Because he is waiting for our new owners to have permission to offer him the gig!
at least, that is what I like to think is going down behind the scene.
There’s some value in continuity, but if last year is any indication, there’s no value left in Don Nelson. He coached badly and lazily, and the few players that vocally supported him have now been shipped out of town. This is a young team that makes a lot of mistakes. Forcing them to play another year under a guy that doesn’t give a damn is only going to cement a lot of those mistakes… there’s more risk in keeping him than in firing him. The big man’s simply gotta go.
Who should replace him? Not sure, but offering a one-year deal to Keith Smart wouldn’t be a bad idea. He knows the “system” (to whatever degree there is one), the players know him, and he at least demands a little accountability. I’m not at all convinced he’d make a good head coach, but if he proves to suck, you can just ship him out and do a full-on search next summer.
But Smart, Shaw, Jackson, Frank, whoever… doesn’t really matter. Don Nelson has to go. This franchise won’t take a step forward under an unmotivated coach.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
by onlxn on Aug 2, 2010 10:57 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
unfair assessment
Nelson had an up and down season last year as coach. He started off pretty well I think, he seemed out of it for a long stretch after jackson left and we had a string of injuries. He seemed to be back into it when the new players from the D-League played well and when Curry really blossomed.
Its also important to give him at least some credit for the success of the D-League guys and Curry. Curry wants him back – so that is at least one player that supports him, and a pretty important one.
I’m OK with him leaving and Smart stepping in until more coaches become available, but to label Nellie’s whole effort as bad and lazy is, well, lazy.
I don't have anything against Nelson
But his coaching over the last couple seasons has lacked the creativity that I’ve grown accustomed to from him. I’ve always found his rotations questionable, but in the past he’s made up for that by creating and exploiting mismatches, devising unique and unconventional defenses (an underrated part of his coaching IMO), and creating a fun and exciting atmosphere for the players. Those are things I love about Nelson, but I just haven’t been seeing as much of it over the last couple seasons.
Golden State Warriors '10-'11 Season: The Return of ^^^^
Take a look at what happened the past couple of seasons and you'll get your answer
Ellis was injured by the moped. Bdiddy gone, Harrington gone, Barnes gone, Pietrus gone.
Ellis comes back, all of the team got blown up. Youngest team ever and the most injury riddled team in history probably. All star dleaguers.
by bojangles408 on Aug 2, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm aware of the circumstances...
I’m commenting on Don Nelson’s performance. You can choose to excuse him for that if you want. I’m inclined to give him somewhat of a pass because of the hand he was dealt, but there is no guarantee that he still has the energy and commitment to return to the quality of coach that he has been for most of his career. I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing another year of him, if he’s really into it. I’m not sure that he is. That’s going to be something that the new ownership and their appointed upper management will have to decide.
Golden State Warriors '10-'11 Season: The Return of ^^^^
If it was just the last four years,
maybe you give him a pass for a bad hand. But being dealt bad hands is Nellie’s history, and a some point you realize that all those bad hands were lack of skill. Most coaches don’t make that much difference, it’s often said, but a few coaches make a tremendous difference in their teams.
Brian Shaw is, at least on paper, the most likely candidate to achieve that status. He’s probably the frontrunner for the Lakers’ next head coach. Hiring him now is a reasonable risk at getting exactly who you need as a dynastic coach.
Retaining Nellie is “Hey it’s a new era…. with the same old loveable drunk driving the bus.”
So which statement do you want to make, if you’re Joe Lacob?
Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.
Well...
Retaining Nellie is "Hey it’s a new era…. with the same old loveable drunk driving the bus."
So which statement do you want to make, if you’re Joe Lacob?
Given the circumstances, I don’t think letting Nelson coach next season would really be making much of a statement at all. I like to take the long view that finding the right management team and the right coach to replace Nelson is more important that making a big splash or a big statement right away. I’m probably in the minority though.
If it was my team my first move would be to find the right guy to run the team. I’d put that person in above Riley as the President of Basketball Operations and allow him time to evaluate the situation and make his recommendations. In the meantime I’d keep Riley (working in a limited capacity under the new Pres.) and Nelson until the new Pres. has time to put his strategy in place and find the guys he wants long term. That could take a week or it could wait until next offseason.
I would love to start the year with a bright new team of people running the Warriors from owner on down to coach, but I don’t think all of that can happen in time. If they pull it off, then great. If not, I won’t be worried.
Golden State Warriors '10-'11 Season: The Return of ^^^^
I suspect they're trying to do just that.
Given the other half of this organization is Hollywood, I expect spectacle and a big splash. You open with a statement, big and bold. You get people excited. The same face isn’t it – the only excitement it can generate is lukewarm “it won’t be so bad”.
Keeping Nellie is lousy storytelling, quite apart from any basketball arguments that can be made (and I really don’t buy them at all.) So that’s argument two – Nellie is more valuable as face of the past than as face on anything resembling the present.
Reason 3: You’re the new owner – do you really keep someone who is “very relaxed (knowing chuckle)” the first time you speak with him on the phone? Seriously?
What we’ve seen so far are teasers. Trailers to the main event, which will likely start with ratification of the sale and end with opening night. Lacob’s “Nellie Decision” will be timed for maximum effect… not because of circumstances beyond their control.
Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.
Totally agree w/ this.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Ha
Hey, I’m all for being entertained. If they can pull it together in time for the beginning of the season and get it right I’ll be stoked. I would like a little steak with my sizzle though, so here’s hoping that whatever it is making that big splash will actually help us win basketball games.
Reason 3: You’re the new owner – do you really keep someone who is "very relaxed (knowing chuckle)" the first time you speak with him on the phone? Seriously?
Forgot about that part of the interview. That was pretty funny.
Having said all of this, I think you are probably right on about what the new ownership intends to do. They do seem very image conscious, and they are probably aching to separate themselves from the previous regime. I totally can’t blame them for that.
Golden State Warriors '10-'11 Season: The Return of ^^^^
Nelson had an up and down season last year as coach. He started off pretty well I think, he seemed out of it for a long stretch after jackson left and we had a string of injuries. He seemed to be back into it when the new players from the D-League played well and when Curry really blossomed.
So you’re fine with a coach that isn’t always “into it”? You think it’s unreasonable to ask for a coach that’s actually motivated for 82 games? Okay then.
to label Nellie’s whole effort as bad and lazy is, well, lazy.
What’s lazy is assuming Nellie coached well at the end of the season just because we managed to win a couple games. Nellie was terrible all year last year.
Why, exactly, does Nellie deserve credit for the D-League guys? We found some good ones, but it’s not like Nellie only played the good ones… he played every player under 6’ 8" all the time, with no real rhyme or reason. If you want to assign credit for the D-Leaguers, give it to Larry Riley, or better yet, to the players themselves.
There’s this weird fallacy around here that any young Warrior that does well does so solely because Don Nelson is guiding them along. Is the idea that Stephen Curry would’ve sucked under another coach? I doubt he would’ve. Frankly, under another coach, I’m guessing Curry would’ve been better, as another coach might’ve bothered telling him that he shouldn’t foul more than any NBA guard had in years. Another coach also might’ve bothered telling Monta to shoot less, and might’ve bothered to give his big men a longer leash, seeing as the ‘09-’10 Warriors were, quite literally, the worst rebounding team in league history.
Look, I love Don Nelson too. He doesn’t care anymore, and he turned in an embarrassing and unprofessional performance last year. You don’t get to just stop coaching because some of your players get hurt.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
This post just makes me think that you didn't watch very many games last year...
by WheresMyChippy on Aug 2, 2010 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, you’re right… Nellie’s stunt in that one game totally negated all the other bad coaching he did in the 70+ games I watched.
Ya Blew It!
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Hey could you post some links about the advanced statistics you were talking about lately? It was VORP, and WAARP, or something like that. Thanks onIxn!
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 2, 2010 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions
I was just using that as an example
But I think it at least shows that you’re wrong when you say “he doesn’t care anymore.” And it wasn’t a “stunt” he was protecting his players from further injuring themselves.
All the bad coaching you saw doesn’t negate all the good coaching I saw in the 81 games I watched.
If you really think that Nelson was “terrible all year last year” and you really watched 70+ games then there’s nothing I can say to convince you. We must have completely different notions of what good coaching is and what was possible with the team he had.
I don’t believe any other coach in the world could have gotten near 26 wins or stayed competitive in as many games as we did with the most injury-riddled team in history.
by WheresMyChippy on Aug 2, 2010 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t believe any other coach in the world could have gotten near 26 wins or stayed competitive in as many games as we did with the most injury-riddled team in history.
I’m not a nellie fan but I gotta agree with you, We shoulda drafted 3rd but somehow nellie got those scrubs to win enough games to move us down to 6th.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 3, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions
But I think it at least shows that you’re wrong when you say "he doesn’t care anymore." And it wasn’t a "stunt" he was protecting his players from further injuring themselves.
There’s a difference between “caring about your players not getting hurt” and “caring enough to put in a good performance”. And by the way, Nellie wasn’t always careful about guys not getting hurt. By his own admission, he badly overused Turiaf for a stretch in the winter when Ronny shouldn’t have been playing.
All the bad coaching you saw doesn’t negate all the good coaching I saw in the 81 games I watched.
Nellie only coached 72 games, so at least nine of the ones you saw were irrelevant. But tell me: what good things did he do? What are some tangible, concrete good coaching decisions that he made? Because I can and have listed a bunch of bad ones.
I don’t believe any other coach in the world could have gotten near 26 wins or stayed competitive in as many games as we did with the most injury-riddled team in history.
Look, Nellie’s my favorite coach of all time too, but this is where things just get silly. You really think that Phil Jackson or Gregg Popovich couldn’t have gotten near 26 wins?
The ‘09-’10 Warriors were a bad and injured team. They still underperformed. They demonstrably underperformed, in fact, posting a 26-56 record despite having the point differential of a 31-51 team. Why? Luck, in large part, but also because the team was completely unprepared for late game situations, far more so than other young teams. Whose fault is that, if not the coach’s?
Why did Monta drive into triple teams in the fourth quarter night after night? Why did Curry foul so damn often, helping to send our opponents to the line more often than any other team’s? Why did Andris, even before his free throw woes really began, spend so much time setting picks 25 feet away from the basket? Why did Mikki Moore, one of the very worst players in basketball last season, start for two months? Why did Vladimir friggin’ Radmanovic get a longer leash than Anthony Randolph?
The answer to all of these questions is the same: because Don Nelson was asleep at the wheel. He turned in an atrocious coaching performance last season. If you think he was good, your mind is going to be absolutely blown by the next guy. Wait till you see actual planning and forethought and energy again.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Any human being
would speak up about an injured player going out to the court. Being stubborn with the refs is the least a coach can do to defend his/her player. What Nellie displayed was awesome. However, it has nothing to do with actual basketball coaching.
This is Kristin Kreuk, now zip it. - GTTM
While I agree that Nellie seemed to be lazy during the middle of the season
The last couple months of the season he seemed to get it done, especially with the roster he had.
He is getting paid anyways, and imo, drunk Nellie is still better than Smart, and I’d rather keep Nellie unless they have a sure fire head coach ready to take in the team right now.
;-P
by Badly Browned on Aug 2, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
I’d rather keep Nellie unless they have a sure fire head coach ready to take in the team right now.
Given the awkward timing of the sale (it’s likely to drag into training camp, and maybe even the beginning of the season) I’m not opposed to the idea of letting Nelson finish out his contract and having a year long search for a new coach. Personally I’d place the priority on finding a new GM or President of Basketball Ops before dealing with the coaching staff. It might work out well for everyone to let him coach next season with the understanding that he won’t be coming back. A lame-duck coach isn’t a good situation, but it would probably be better that having an interim coach for the whole year. Especially since Nelson seems ready to step away from coaching after this season.
Golden State Warriors '10-'11 Season: The Return of ^^^^
“Lame duck” seems more appropriate for a coach in the last year of his contract who doesn’t intend to retire. Nellie seems more like “roast duck” or “duck flambe.” Unless there is an obvious young guy that ownership thinks they can plug in to be the man from day one, I say let Nellie captain the good ship lollipop into the Maui sunset.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
the few players that vocally supported him have now been shipped out of town.
you talkin about Rudolf?
Don’t Binky and DLee support nellie? How about Montay , Reggie, Udon, or DoorL?
I kinda get the feeling this team would prefer nellie’s experience for one more year to a new coach learning the ropes? I know I would. So bring on DocRivers or let the old guy go out with a playoff run.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 2, 2010 11:17 AM PDT reply actions
the counter argument would be
kinda get the feeling this team would prefer nellie’s experience for one more year to a new coach learning the ropes? I know I would.
You’re just delaying the inevitable growing pains. It might benefit Curry more from getting new coach ASAP and going throughout those pains with some new teammates (Lee) and ultimately putting team in strong position for the long haul.
My 2 cents are this. You don’t fire Nelson without having a CLEAR idea of who you want to bring in. Firing him without alternatives is a dangerous gamble and one that usually ends in horribly.
It might benefit Curry more from getting new coach ASAP and going throughout those pains with some new teammates (Lee) and ultimately putting team in strong position for the long haul.
Curry blossomed more under nellie than anyone expected. Even the Dleaguers performed well enough to screw up our draft pick so I doubt a new coach right now could carry that momentum over any better than nellie. Problem might be that nellie would rather take a buy out and go relax but if so let’s let him make that decision?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 2, 2010 11:46 AM PDT reply actions
We should guarantee Shaw the deal now or next season and have everything lined up
I know it’s crazy, W’s with a plan. How silly
This is my sig, what do I do with it?
this would be an old Warriors mentality plan
Get a guy who hasn’t proven himself to come learn on the job! Great plan! It worked great with Carlesimo, Cowens, Mussleman, Adelman, Winters, Montgomery!
I’d rather wait until we can get a proven winner at the NBA level.
It'll be a mirage
"The No. 1 thing (fans need to know): we’re going to do our damnedest to bring the Warriors to respectability on the basketball court." - Joe Lacob
As much as I have disliked Nellie over the last few years
I kinda have the feeling he is the best coach for the job with the new makeup of the team. We’ll have to see. It all depends on two things:
1) Can Andris become the super efficient, high rebounding player he used to be…thus making it so Nellie CANT take him off the floor?
2) Can Ellis become the super efficient, off the ball side-kick that he was a few years back?
If those two things happen, I think Nellie would be a great fit. This team would basically be IDEAL for Nelson as coach as long as we get one more super versatile guy for coming off the bench.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawkGSW on Aug 2, 2010 11:40 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd
Those two things are the key for a successful Nelson-coached season.
Ideal is the word.
by WheresMyChippy on Aug 3, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
no lame comments
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 3, 2010 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I say keep him...
Im not entirely happy but lets give nelly a shot!
he has david lee to work with and lets see what will happen!
also skeptic nice! you a J. Cole Fan!
Nellie cannot win with some of these posters
If he criticizes players (Andris, Monta, Randolph) he is alienating them and being a jerk.
If he doesn’t criticize he is disinterested and lazy.
At the end of the day, players play and coaches coach. Some players choose to listen to the coaches and some don’t, and the only way a coach can respond is benching him. However, this becomes a no win situation because fans and owners want to see them play and players, who have power, can just negotiate a way out of town instead of wising up and learning to listen to the coach.
I agree he was not into his job for all 82 games last year, I am not into my job everyday I go in either, especially when things are really tough. However, when he chooses to coach his wisdom is so much greater than any of the youngster coaches (shaw, smart, etc) that it makes it tough to say let’s have change for the sake of change.
I am torn on Nellie staying or leaving still – but I think labeling him an awful coach or a great coach is equally ignorant.
If he criticizes players (Andris, Monta, Randolph) he is alienating them and being a jerk.
If he doesn’t criticize he is disinterested and lazy.
Speaking personally, I have no beef with a coach criticizing players if doing so helps the team. I never had a problem with anything Nellie said about Randolph, for example. I just thought it was stupid that he still wouldn’t play the kid when Randolph started playing well. What kind of message does that send?
I agree he was not into his job for all 82 games last year, I am not into my job everyday I go in either, especially when things are really tough.
I’m guessing you’re not being paid five million dollars to do your job.
However, when he chooses to coach his wisdom is so much greater than any of the youngster coaches (shaw, smart, etc) that it makes it tough to say let’s have change for the sake of change.
The last time I saw Nellie’s wisdom actually help the Warriors was in January of 2009, when he installed a drive-and-kick offense that improved things a bit. Since then, all of his creativity hasn’t done a damn thing. In truth, it hasn’t even really been that creative… if you’re always going to go small, your opponents are going to have a pretty easy time figuring you out.
I think Nellie is a basketball genius, but I’d rather have a guy who always “chooses to coach”, as opposed to sometimes.
I am torn on Nellie staying or leaving still – but I think labeling him an awful coach or a great coach is equally ignorant.
That’s funny, because I think he’s clearly both: he’s been a great coach historically, he’s an awful one now. Believe me, I’d be as happy as anyone to see the old motivated Nellie walking the sidelines. But that guy’s been gone for awhile now. The current version’s just holding this team back.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
More and more
I’m thinking Nellie is historically a slightly-above-average coach, but not a great one. A lot of that has to do with the volatility of his record- wide variances in win % year to year argue for a greater luck factor (and therefore lower skill factor) than narrow ones do, especially over a 20+ year span.
The last two year span has been among the worst in Warrior history. Other than the ’90s (other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?) you have to go back to ’52 to find a worse 2-year pair. The context is: worse than Adelman. Worse than Musselman. Worse than Montgomery. Of course, we also now know that Adelman is a far more successful coach than Nellie over their careers to date.
Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.
How is Adelman's career > Nellie's career?
There is a large discrepency between both now, but over their careers, Nellie trumps him.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 3, 2010 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions
How do you figure?
Nellie’s career winning percentage is .557. In 31 years, he’s 136 games over .500.
Adleman’s career winning percentage is .610. In 19 years, he.s 162 games over .500.
In 19 years, Adleman has won 14 playoff series made the finals twice.
In 31 years, Nellie has won 17 playoff series and made the finals never.
I’ve never been impressed by Adleman as a coach, and downright hated him as Warriors coach, but’s it’s pretty hard to argue with his results. They are better than Nellie’s results.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
Related FanShots on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
