@STEIN_LINE_HQ Just filed to ESPN.com: Mike Brown and Dwane Casey will get two of the first interviews for Golden State's coaching opening. Link on the way
Espn on twitter stating that Golden State is beginning it's interviews. What do you think?
about 1 year ago
ferask1
244 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Dwane Casey
I kind of suspected, but Mike Brown? Very interesting.
Out of these too
who would we rather have. I don’t want Brown, hopefully we will choose Casey over Brown
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
Why don’t you like Brown? I think the defensive collapse of Cleveland, post-Lebron, has at least been interesting. They went from 6th in the league to 29th in the league (so…..second to last) over the past year. If nothing else, it’s at least a point to consider.
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions
I understand his
defensive approach but I question the way he ran thier offense in cleveland. I don’t want to see Monta iso every single play. The only way I’ll accept him is if he gives Curry the keys to the car like Nellie did and took Monta off the ball alot more
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
We need a defensive approach
Curry, Monta, Lee… to a degree reggie, dorell and others won’t forget how to play O.
by tafkasam on May 10, 2011 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Thats true
something about him really irks me though lol. But if he brings better defense and lets Curry do his thing it wouldnt matter
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
We need a defensive approach no doubt.
Hopefully Brown used his time off to rethink his philosophy on offense.
I just think that
it would be nice to get a Dwayne Casey (this year’s Tom Thib) or Stan Van Gundy (this year’s Doug Collins) to generate some excitement, Mike Brown no matter how good he may be, will he generate that excitement. I don’t know his reputation with players much but I do respect his knowledge and ability.
I rather have Casey
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
Tom Thib is this years Mike Brown
Seriously, whats the difference? good regular season, playoff time, it’s been derrick rose iso EVERY play. There offense has been attrocious and he has more weapons to use than Lebron did
i actually agree
monta ellis can be that derrick rose. however, rose also had a lot of help on the defensive end. but that was due to thib bringing out the defensive prowless…so mike brown could be our thibs.
still want van gundy though…maybe he can help beans out….
by bimmercirem3 on May 10, 2011 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
When Monta has tried to do too much on offense, the results haven’t been good…
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Mike Brown's philsophy on offense wasn't awful
Wasn’t good either, but we should point out in regular season, top 5 in assists while not being top 10 in scoring. They shared the ball well. What happened in playoff time, I find hard to blame on him.
If you’re playing cleveland, what would your game plan be? Um stop lebron and make anyone else beat me. And even then who did he lose to? Teams with more all around talent..
They did win 60+ games twice with a really questionable supporting cast.
I think people need to stop believing the maverick carter hype, and blaming mike brown for cleveland. Blame Danny Ferry. They NEVER had a top 5 roster. They had a top 3 player, who else on that team comes in top 10 at their position? Mo Williams? Delonte? Anthony Parker? Anderson Varejao? Big Z? Shaq? Shaw might one only one. And that’s not to say they aren’t decent players but aside from varejao, who out of them would start for warriors?
It’s WAY too easy to blame mke brown there. That’s what Lebrons PR machine did. Truthfully it’s unfair. There management was as inept as GSWs. If we ever got so lucky as to draft a player of lebron’s talent i should HOPE we can build better around him.
I agree with you that the real problem with Cleveland -
- was the supporting cast and the lack of vision from the front office which had them just adding pieces wily-nily to try and add some value. You’ve got to build with a plan.
I was originally skeptical about Brown as a coach, and while I still have some reservations, I’m certainly open to the idea of him being a good choice.
Yeah I'm not sure how I feel about Brown
I just feel bad for the guy. He is generally viewed as reasons Cleveland lost. That’s unfair.
This doesn’t make him a great coach, it just doesn’t mean he’s Keith Smart or some bad coach either.
More or less agree. I’m not sure Brown is a good coach, but looking back on what he was doing in Cleveland….I can’t really point out anything he did wrong, either, and their huge collapse since at least suggests to me maybe Brown really was having a pretty big positive influence.
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions
People bash his offense too much. If you had Lebron on your team, you’d give the ball to him every play too.
by Slightly Hyphy on May 10, 2011 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Except
at the end of the game lol
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
He's had some pretty impressive end-of-game moments.
See that 3-pter the other night?
Jordan missed his share of game-winners, too, you know.
Lebrons end of game decision making is worse than Kobe and MJs
Sorry. He consistently does what he shouldn’t. Those two guys generally took shots they could make. Why does lebron try to emulate them with off the dribble mid range jumper? He rarely makes it. Why did he do that in game 4? He’s lucky Bosh typed it in. Otherwise it was a horrendous play. 10 times worse than when Kobe does it and misses. Why? Cause it’s a low bbiq play. Kobe makes that shot around 50% (hoopdata) Lebron does not.
Under no circumstance should LEbron have done anything other than drive by pierce. He could have dumped if they rotated to try and draw a charge. Or he could have gone to rim, where he either finishes or get free throws. That’s the difference between LEbron and Rose. Rose has a higher end of game IQ. He knows where to go. He tries to get looks he can make (see getting to rim v. Indiana)
Please don’t quote me end of game percentages cause that’s irrelevant. You don’t make every shot. But it’s vital you get into position of a shot you do make. Which is why guys like Carmelo, Dirk and Ray Allen have highest last shot percentages. Look at typically what they take? One of there patented shots.
If I remember right, Lebron does generally have pretty good end of game/clutch numbers or however you want to define. I agree that sometimes his decisionmaking is suspect, and his numbers should be even higher, but I’m pretty sure overall he doesn’t do that bad a job.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions
He's got above league average numbers
Whatever that means. I’m not a fan of clutch stats in anyway. They are so subjective, so bias, and such a small sample.
I do find final 6-8 minutes more intriguing. This is where you see why Lebron, and to a lesser degree why Kobe are great players. How many times have you seen them pull there team back into a game (see kobe v. warriors in january when we led whole game) in final 8 minutes, or whenever they sub back in. Or how many times have you seen a close game, they pull there team away. It’s not a 1 possession thing, it’s a 10-15 possession thing where they make shots, they make the right pass, they d up etc.
Sometimes I feel we should pay more attention to 4th quarter stats. Particularly in games which are with in 8-10 points. This is when teams play hardest defense, and where stat inflation may not matter.
In systems like ours it’s vital. It’s a reason I was skeptical on David Lee out of new york. I recall i watched 1 game, He had his way all game v. boston, PnR, had something like 11-16, 24 points entering 4th. Ended game 13-22, 28 points. Looks great, but basically Boston settled down, Garnett D’d him up, and that was that. Sample’s small but I do believe it’d make an interesting case study.
Back to Lebron- plain and simple he settles for way too many jumpers at end of game. Incredibly stupid since he’s a bad shooter and unlike players, even like Monta, I can’t think of any spot on the court where I go ’that’s lebron’s sweet spot’.
Not knocking him for not being a jump shooter (why should he), but if you’re not, don’t take it
They are so subjective, so bias
?
I find your contrasting of Kobe/Lebron interesting. The stats really seem to contradict your story about Kobe.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions
I would imagine
that Brown would coach this team much differently than Cleveland. We don’t have a Lebron.
by eastbayglory on May 10, 2011 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
You didn't hear?
Monta’s is second best in the league behind Kobe and ahead of Lebron! So his offense will be the exact same…
by JustSomeName on May 10, 2011 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
“I don’t want to see Monta iso every single play. "
Yeah. But it’s hard to know how much of him letting LeBron Iso that much was because he’s, well, Lebron.
There aren’t a lot of players who it makes sense to design an offense around isolations with … but LeBron is one of them.
But I’d absolutely, postively, be asking him a lot of questions in the interview about what sort of offense he wanted to run here.
Fair point, however, I also think it’s a fair point to say that the way he ran the offense in Cleveland was pretty optimal. Giving it to Lebron every time really was the best option – look what happened when he left.
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly, look what happened without Lebron. We found out nobody else on that entire team was a capable offensive player….
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Big Z
His 17 footer is unguardable.
The only playcall I;d run is big Z in high post, have him hold ball up high over his head, and make a decision
Huh?
It’s really not.
His FG% on that shot over the past five years:
43%, 35%, 44%, 40%, 39%.
And that’s with an “assisted” percentage of 96%, 96%, 93%, 88%, and 96%.
Basically you’re happy to have him take that shot – and it takes someone setting him up to get it for him.
I really don’t understand why you think that’s such a great offensive weapon. This isn’t the first time you brought this up – and we pointed out all these flaws the last time.
Big Z taking 17-footers is a losing strategy.
dude, it's a joke...
But seriously, he’s 7ft4, who’s gonna block it ;)
Honestly, it's not any dumber than some of the stuff people here post seriously.
And jokes are supposed to be – you know – funny.
What's the avg. fg% on a 17-20 foot shot?
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
A step beyond that
There playoff failures have nothing to do with Mike Brown or Lebron. The teams which beat cleveland had better all around talent.
If you’re Boston or Orlando what would you do v. Cleveland? Double Lebron and dare anyone else to beat you.
The fact they couldn’t get him a viable 2nd all star to put them over the top is on danny ferry’s head. Not Mike Brown.
Article also mentions
Lawrence Frank/Stan Van Gundy/Sloan too.
I know nothing about Lawrence Frank but Stan Van Gundy is a pretty popular pick if we can pry him away. Certainly can get attention with him.
Mike Brown without Lebron James is as good as Keith Smart...
by JustSomeName on May 10, 2011 1:56 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
On the other hand, Cleveland just won 42 games less this year than last year. Can you really credit all of that to Lebron?
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I actually want to bold that part. They won 42 more games last year. I wonder if that’s the biggest one year decline ever. Gotta at least be up there…
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions
They lost Big Z and Shaq
Verajao and Mo Williams were out most of the year with injuries
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
"It’s not all about stats…you’ve probably never played basketball in your life. There are things called intangibles. He is what you call a winner. Led his team to a national title. We need people who know how to win. He obviously has to be doing something right." (dhod)
True, plus Delonte, added Baron, etc. There were quite a bit of changes from last year to this year. What’s less clear is whether any of those, besides Lebron, were very meaningful….
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
well, probably
I don’t think anyone quite saw such a big dropoff from just losing LeBron. I expected 30-40 wins.
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
"It’s not all about stats…you’ve probably never played basketball in your life. There are things called intangibles. He is what you call a winner. Led his team to a national title. We need people who know how to win. He obviously has to be doing something right." (dhod)
actually i had a couple arguments with friends at school (lakers fans)
that cleveland without lebron was a 20 win team and that the lakers without kobe is a 45 win team. they were convinced that lebron actually wasnt that good and that cleveland would still be a playoff team without him. look how that turned out…
Laker fans really aren't that bright.
I mean they all hate Lebron, and say that nonsense.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Baron was actually really good with them.
If they didn’t get him, i doubt they get to 19 wins.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Why did Cleveland
get rid of him then if he was such a great coach for them?
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
I dunno. Maybe he wasn’t a great coach. Maybe they thought they needed someone new to help entice Lebron to come back. Maybe they just needed a scapegoat for their lack of a championship. Maybe they didn’t realize how good he was or how big of an impact he was….
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions
LEBRON
Maverick Carter and LEbron’s PR machine blamed Brown for the losses.
Cleveland fired him because they thought it was there only way to keep him.
What both sides missed was it wasn’t brown fault they didnt win. It wassn’t lebrons fault.
it was Danny Ferry, Dan Gilbert and upper management’s inability to put a championship caliber roster together. Seriously? Both Orlando in 09 and Boston in ‘10 were much better. If you compared starting 5s in both cases you’d go “ok best player is Lebron, player 2 thru 6 all on the opposing team”
Yep, I've got to think the blame goes to upper management.
Had they fielded a championship caliber roster, perhaps LBJ keeps his talents in Cleveland. Maybe LBJ couldn’t stand being the second biggest star in Cleveland to Betty White.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
You think they win it allwith amare?
Rumor was amare for hickson, wally’s expiring and picks.
Mo, Parker, LBJ, Amare, Big Zizzle/Varejao
Well, the right answer surely wasn't the one they picked.
=)
But I really wasn’t necessarily pointing to the Amare example, but I probably would’ve gone with him in hindsight too. I’m talking about since having LBJ from 2003-2010. I agree they should’ve had a plan instead of “willy-nillying” around. Who knows maybe they did have a 20-point plan laid out, but it just stunk.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
agreed
just curious if you think that team could beat boston. Maybe? It would give them a legitimate second offensive option. They had enough D.
All I know is i'd probably do the opposite of what they did and see what happens.
It couldn’t be a worse outcome than what happened in reality, right?
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
Mike Brown declined the Rockets interview for a shot at the Warriors' coaching vacancy.
Food for thought.
Well
to me the Warriors seem like a better team on paper, but I’m biased. :)
We're not as complete of a team as the Rockets
They’ve been coached up by Adelman, our guys have had Nelly/Smart. So it’s going to take some time with the Warriors to learn how to actually play team basketball on both ends of the floor.
But Curry may be the best building piece among the two teams. Better fans, place to live, new ownership, there’s a lot of promise to build something here, no guarantees of course. But that may be more attractive to him than leading the Rockets to a 6-8 seed next year.
by eastbayglory on May 10, 2011 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I think we're both pretty even in terms of our starting 5, but their bench seems a bit deeper than our's
Curry>Lowry
Monta>Martin
DWright>Budinger
Lee>Scola
Biedrins<Hayes(aka Warrior Killer)
6th man:
Reggie<Courtney Lee
Obviously, we’re all biased for our own GSWs, but ask any fan in the NBA and any of those comparisons could go either way.
by JustSomeName on May 10, 2011 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
And Hayes over Biedrins
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
Yeah, I was just voicing my disagreements!
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Lee over Scola???
LOLZ.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
Nah, I think the Rox are in a better position.
I could care less who had the better record this year cause we both sucked. But the Rockets seems like they’ll suck less hard and for shorter than we will.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
He might like Lacob and direction they want to go
Just saying, if I’m a coach, aggressive hungry ownership is very attractive. Houston may have 1 of the top 3-5 GMs in nba, but there owner is no ray of sunshine…
I think I’d probably be worried about Adelman getting let go in Houston if I was another coach. With his reputation, that he was seen as doing a good job, that it didn’t seem anybody wanted him gone, that it seemed sudden/surprising…..those things would concern me.
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Adelman got let go because of a dispute with owner
supposedly.
Not Morey. Morey being the GM has to back his boss.
So if that’s true, wouldn’t you be concerned the owner might do the same thing to you?
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions
That seems pretty charitable:
I see something more like:
Curry>Lowry
Monta = or < Martin
DWright > or = Budinger
Lee = Scola
Biedrins<<Hayes(aka Warrior Killer)
Defense matters.
People who like Brown seem to be in the vast minority.
Surprising.
"I'm not a big vegetable guy'' he says. -Tim Lincecum
NBA coaching sources say that the Warriors also do intend to reach out to coaching veterans Jeff Van Gundy (also an ESPN NBA analyst) and Jerry Sloan to gauge their interest in succeeding Smart, but it is not immediately known if those conversations will progress to the interview stage.
Do this first, please.
"I'm not a big vegetable guy'' he says. -Tim Lincecum
by ejdacanay on May 10, 2011 2:09 PM PDT reply actions 5 recs
i think espn cant report that as official
because van gundy is doing the broadcast during the playoffs. but i think joe lacob will definitely try and get van gundy HARD. mike brown and others are just options.
by bimmercirem3 on May 10, 2011 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes it is.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
He had Minnesota at a .500 record when they fired him.
After he was let go, they finished like 16 games under .500
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh, did i mention they didn't have a single decent player besides KG?
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Thats still not enough cred to consider him a upgrade over smart. If your Monta and Steph the hiring of Casey does not make me confident this team is turning the corner. Bring in a guy who has jewelry to show as a coach or at least a guy with a respected name.
Bring in a guy who has jewelry to show as a coach or at least a guy with a respected name.
Why are these so important to you?
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:45 AM PDT up reply actions
Because if you are removing your coach for a upgrade and want the players to be confident in your organization and your coach you have to bring in a guy that has been to the promised land. A guy who players know has succeeded and knows how to win.
Eh. I think that's not as big a deal as you make it out to be.
But heck, who knows, Casey might have a ring in a month or two …
Its a huge deal. If Smart retired of left for another job it wouldnt matter as much. But to fire a coach that had a good relationship with his players to bring in a guy with a thin resume and no rings is not wise.
Rings are a shortcut to player's respect when he walks in the door -
- but the reality is that after the first week of real games, it’s about the players feeling that he’s putting them in a position to win (or look good, depending on which they case about).
Curry and Lee strike me as players who will respect a coach who comes in and starts putting in an offense that makes sense. The only thing that worries me is Monta, because he’s the one who’s going to be asked to do things which look a lot like sacrifices (eg, shoot less.).
No sir(or mam) rings are what will get players to follow you period. All throughout the season and their career. Its so very few coaches in the league that has rings that players will run thru a wall for the guys that have them.
Right, because no coaches with rings as assistants have had any trouble ever getting players to follow them.
I mean, J-Ridah, really?
I know you have a penchant for gross overstatement, but this:
rings are what will get players to follow you period
is just silly.
I have no idea. Its not silly. This is a different situation. This is a owner that is out to make a bold statement and is out to prove that he knows what he’s doing. There are only 3 Owners in this league that are brash and bold and outspoken. Cuban,Prokhorov and Lacob. So for Lacob to fire a coach that was well liked and respected by his players he has to replace him with a guy who has had success in the NBA as a assistant or as a head coach. You have to have somebody in the organization who has participated in a championship setting before. Right now the only ppl in the entire organization with a ring is Lacob and Dorell. If you want to get the best out of Lee,Curry and Monta you have to bring in a coach that has won big before especially if this is your 3rd coach in 3 years. Your more likely to follow somebody further that has been somewhere than somebody who has never been there and is just as lost as you are. It would even mean more if it was a player that won a championship and became a coach than a coach that just has been a assistant on mediocre teams.
How much can you hold the coach accountable for that, though?
I mean, look, Phil Jackson wouldn’t have been able to get that team to the playoffs.
It’s hard to judge how good a job a coach is doing by his record, because the talent level makes a bigger difference than the level of coaching.
My point is that if your a new owner and you want to make a statement to the players,fans and media you dont fire Smart to bring in a guy who has accomplished as much or as little as smart has. You bring in a guy who has had success to show the world that you mean what you say.
Fair enough.
But I disagree. I don’t think you make a hire based on “making a statement.”
You make a hire because you think the guy’s the best coach for the job.
Smart was not the best person for the job, and had to go. If “making a statement” is your primary motivation, you’re probably going to make a bad hire.
I think Casey would be an ok choice
but I still wish we could get Budenholzer or Lawrence Frank
Why would Casey be a ok choice? His resume sucks.
http://www.nba.com/coachfile/dwane_casey/index.html
You have the inside scoop
Who do they want?
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
Tell us.
Just don’t say its going to happen.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Alright since you ask, As of now there is no frontrunner and the interview process will consist of whoever makes Lacob believe they can win with a small back court and a uptempo-defensive oriented system. Thats probably not news but from what I hear Lacob does not have a frontrunner now that Budenholzer is not available. I heard Brown will be in Thursday for his interview. I heard Lacob was considering interviewing Larry Brown next week which nobody has reported yet. Lacob liked the fact that he was able to win with a small backcourt in Philly and that he has a ring.
Is Joe Lacob really this committed to keeping a small backcourt...?
I’m concerned, because that isn’t public BS stuff, thats actually what he thinks right? Shoot, we’re screwed.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Just trade Monta Joe, it's not that hard.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Lacob often wonders why Derrick Rose gets so much credit and adoration while Monta gets hate and trade demands. So do I.
Rose brings things to the table other than his (over-rated) scoring.
Monta doesn’t.
It’s not that complicated.
And isn't a bad defender for his position.
I know his +/- are bad, but their defense is still really good with him in. It just goes to something flukey like 94 points per 100 possessions when he’s out. I mean, i don’t think he’s great but thats not even realistic haha.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah he is.
He’s very far behind. I’m really disappointed in Lacob if thats what he really believes.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't know how you define "talent"
Because a big problem in Monta’s game is his decision making, it’s easy to feel like he isn’t maximizing his potential.
On the other hand, BBIQ is a part of talent, isn’t it? And Rose’s is a lot better (although I’m not convinced it’s great).
I know basketball is a team game but Monta would beat Rose in a 1 on 1. That has no bearing on the warriors im just saying Monta can drive like rose but has a better stroke. He’s a 2 guard so its not fair to expect him to have the decision making skills of a 1. I dont have the numbers in front of me but im sure its not a great disparity in the TO stats.
Rose is a much better passer, scorer, rebounder, defender...its not really close.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Rose has more of a PG's mentality
These playoffs aren’t showing it but watch him consistently, watch him at memphis, he looks to pass and instigate first.
Not to mention he’s got much stickier handles. Beyond Chris Paul, he’s as legitimate a ball handler as anyone in NBA.
On a sidenote, I’m disappointed in Tibs. He’s Mike Brown
From NBA statscube...
To answer the TO question Rose averaged 3.4 TO a game and Ellis averaged 3.2 TO a game. As you correctly pointed out J-Ridah, Rose does possess the “decision making skills of a 1” because he averaged 7.7 assists per game while Monta averaged 5.6 assists. The revealing statistic is the Ast%, which is the estimated percentage of field goals that the player assisted on while in the game. Rose’s is 37.2 percent while Monta’s is only 23.4 percent. These statistics show probably what most people would think: Monta is a SG, Rose is a PG its that simple. Rose has great passing ability, and I wouldn’t expect Ellis to have that because he is a SG and not a PG as you pointed out J-RIDAH.
by Warriors Fanatic on May 10, 2011 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not so sure that Monta would win a game of one-on-one.
While it’s true that playing 1-on-1 would eliminate a ton of Rose’s advantages (decisionmaking, passing, court vision, ball-handling) you’re still left with a two guys who are pretty similar in overall scoring talent, guys who rely on a quick first step to get it done, one who totally sucks on defense and the other who is merely bad at it.
But aren’t passing, ball-handling, and court vision “talent?”
If so, how on earth is Monta more talented?
I think it would probably be
Rose wins on Monday, Monta on Tuesday, Rose on Wednesday….etc.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
If Rose really wanted to, and played really boring, he’d win every time. The secret a lot of people don’t realize about 1 on 1 is the bigger guy will win every time if he plays it the right way. Rose is bigger, a lot stronger, a lot longer, and if he takes his time making his way to the rim on Monta, he’ll score basically every time.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions
That's not what Bob says!!
I think Monta would take him sometimes, but Rose seems bigger and more physical, so he might just bully Monta each time. Monta would try posting Rose up though.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
It's a fun convo
My two cents. in a 1 on 1 game- I’d imagine it goes near 50/50.
Monta has much more offensive variety. Rose has more explosiveness, and what he does, he does better.
That said, Rose isn’t getting his lebron/maggette bump free throws in a one on one game.
Sidenote: I always wished someone like Nike could organize a 1 on 1 contest between best individual players in NBA. Too bad they’d never agree. Can’t see Lebron doing it for one.
That said, Rose isn’t getting his lebron/maggette bump free throws in a one on one game.
True, but if Rose just decides he’s going to get to the rim every single possession, it doesn’t matter. There are no 7 footers out there to contest what he’s doing. He’ll finish over Monta every single time.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Rose's mid range J is better than Monta's.
His 3 point shot is worse, but not by much.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions
What you’re talking about are skills. Skills are just inputs, but what matters to winning is outputs. Skills don’t win basketball games, what you do with those skills does.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Skill matters
But how you use it matters the most.
For as much as Monta has grown, i think Nelson and Smart really did him a major disservice. He has been very under-coached, and in my opinion, is behind where he should be. Now it’s a question of if he can ever get there.
This is why only extremely high IQ players (or niche players) really only develop well in up-tempo systems. Nash, Dirk…Curry would qualify as one if Smart didn’t do him a disservice last year.
He’s a 2 guard so its not fair to expect him to have the decision making skills of a 1
Why isn’t it fair? I’m not saying he should have the passing skills of a PG (he really should, though, given his size), but generaly decision making? Yes, he should know what a smart shot is, and know how to make the most of his talents, as I’d expect of any other basketball player.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Isn't that the problem?
He’s a 2guard who can’t guard 2s. I could care less about this if Monta was 6ft6 and could atleast be average on SGs defensively. But since he isn’t he needs to learn to be a 1.
Yes thats the problem and in my opinion the only problem Monta has. I have no problem with his shot selection until he gets a better post player to defer to. But Monta is a stud.
Why does it have to be a better post player? We have lots of players on the team who, when they shoot, score more points than Monta. He often takes difficult shots in place of other, more efficient scorers.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
You have no problem with Monta's shot selection?
Wow. That’s scary.
It’s not about “defering” to a better player.
It’s about passing the ball when the defense is set and waiting for you to drive. It’s about passing the ball when you’re double-and-tripple teamed rather than going for a circus shot, even if you’re much better than the average player at hitting a circus shot.
(That being said, we already have several players who are better scorers than he is, and he should be doing more to get them involved).
The great thing about basketball is that -
- you don’t need a player to create his own shot in order to get a shot.
That’s where teamwork comes in.
True, But thats like telling MJ or Kobe that. Before Kobe got Pau he didnt defer to anybody. Until Monta gets a post player he wont defer either. You have to realize that Monta is probably the greatest player to ever come out of his state. In his mind he’s a top 5 player.
Why don’t you see that as a problem? With guys like MJ and Kobe, their results doing that were actually good. Our results with Monta doing that have been poor, and like I said before, we actually have other talented offensive players.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Actually, the Lakers shipped out Shaq because Kobe insisted on no longer defering to him -
- despite the fact that Shaq was still a dominant offensive force.
- you don’t need a player to create his own shot in order to get a shot.
Maybe in rec league ball. In the NBA you do need players who can create there own shot.
I’m struggling to think of a successful team who didn’t have multiple players who could create shots (be it out of the post, PnR or iso)
Of course, I have to say, I find the notion that we don’t have anyone to create shots without Monta more than a little dubious. Funny how the offense hasn’t missed a beat without Monta on the floor the last two seasons….
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sure.
But our point is that you don’t need guys who can break down the defense one-on-one and get a mediocre shot consistently to have a good offense.
Which, let’s be honest, is exactly what we’re talking about with Monta. He can get a mediocre shot whenever the heck he wants.
And that’s not nothing. Monta is tremendously talented. Lots of players couldn’t get shots as good as the shots Monta gets as frequently as he gets them.
The problem is that they’re still not good shots.
And I don’t accept that those mediocre shots are the cost of doing business in the NBA. Monta charging into a set defense isn’t helping anyone get a good shot.
A smarter offense would use Monta’s ability to get to the rim more selectively, using it at times when it’s getting the team a good shot rather than a mediocre one.
Well, once you include the pick-and-roll, you're not talking a player creating his own shot -
you’re using the pick to create the shot.
If that’s what you mean, than I agree with you.
But I’d suggest that it’s actually hard to find an example of an NBA team that has a hard time creating shots.
The biggest difference between Rose and Monta is Rose can legitimately play PG
IF Monta could play PG, we’d be fine. He’d be very close to Rose. All our defensive frailties start from fact he can’t.
If he could (theoretical world), we could trade Curry to get a legitimate big. We could sign someone like Afflalo to play defensive 2guard and hit open shots, we’d be infinitely better. If Monta could play PG and average over 7 assists like Rose, he’d be a start, he’d be league known.
But thing is he hasn’t to date. This year he came closest I’ve ever seen to being a playmaker. I’m tempted to wanna see what would happen if we traded Curry and Monta had to assume the role, because we had no options.
But thats WAAYYY too big a gamble to ever justify. I mean if it paid off, you’d look genius. If it flopped and Curry starred, you’d look like….
the warriors :(
Wow, Lacob's really not in tune with reality then...
Hasn’t he been listening to his son??? I know for a fact that’s not what he thinks.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Lacob was not high on Monta before the season started but Monta made him a believer. If Monta didnt change his attitude he would’ve been moved by feb.
That's great to know.
Remind me why Joe Lacob thinks he knows much about basketball again? He’s not a stat whiz like his son, and doesn’t have experience like Riley or Schenk. So pretty much he just thinks what he thinks…great.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions
So you're telling me they won't move him this summer?
Great…
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions
He’s like any fan of the game that got lucky enough to own a team. If you play pickup ball often and follow the nba closely then you’d probably think you knew a thing or 2 about basketball. Especially if you had a championship ring. lol.
I hope he'd leave it up to people like his son and bob myers rather than himself.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I think they are actually pretty smart.
I don’t think Riley is by any stretch of the imagination.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not high on Riley cause he has shown a poor concept of team building at every stop
You have to draft youth, you have to play youth. You can’t go the safe route everytime.
You dont just draft youth to draft it. Thats how you get Brandan Wright. Your basing your theory on 1 draft and that was the drafting of Udoh who was the player that was best capable of being a contributer on both ends of the floor. He was the best post defender in the draft and I still say he was the better pick than Monroe.
I'm basing it on his entire track record with memphis
shareef abdur rahim over ray allen, kobe and co.
Antonio Daniels over TMac
Bibby over vince carter
all needs and ‘safe’ players over high upside
Evaluating NBA and College prospects is Riley and Schlenk’s job. Analyzing data and evaluating players is Kirk Lacob’s job. Negotiating trades and contracts is Myers job for now. But picking the coach will fall on Lacob only. He is the 1 that wanted smart gone.
Well i'm glad he wanted him gone.
And i’m pretty impressed by Kirk.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions
No attack on you,
but I’m really wondering what Kirk has done in the past season that makes you so impressed with him?
by JustSomeName on May 11, 2011 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions
He's been in charge of revamping the analytics department.
And has been doing a lot of projects that you all will soon find out about. One of them was getting all those camera’s installed in the arena. He’s a progressive guy.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 11, 2011 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Definitely remember that article about the cameras, hell I was the one that posted it on this site!
But shouldn’t Travis Schlenk take more credit for that than Kirk. From all the articles over the past season, doesn’t seem like Kirk is really involved much with the team (yet) and he’s more of a keep quiet and absorb all the knowledge type with the front office at this point. Kinda like an intern learning his way still. Yes, he’s known to a stats geek, but I don’t think its translated into much for the team just yet, he’s still learning and has a long way to go before he makes any sort of impact on the front office.
by JustSomeName on May 11, 2011 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Do you have any idea who they're going to draft?
Are they looking into a guard or a big?
Wanna feel real torture? Try being a Warrior fan.
why is fast food so popular ?
lots of folks prefer to assimilate their consumables or info or opinions in a quick, obvious manner. Nationally, Rose is in a much more visible and accessible media market. He’s a leader on a winning team in that market — Ellis wasn’t a team leader in those two seasons his team won. There’s technical stuff too, of course, about court vision and team play, but plenty of fans don’t need to consider those things.
Music is the Healing Force of the Universe (a.ayler)
Probably has something to do with Rose being a lot better than Monta. 24 points, 7.4 assists per 36 on 55% TS% is quite a bit better than 21.5 points, 5 assists per 36, 53.5% TS%, especially when you take into account that Rose really does have to carry that offense whereas Monta does not have to do what he does for our offense. We have lots of talented offensive players he takes touches from. Our offense doesn’t miss a beat when Monta is off the floor – we get half a point per 100 possessions worse. Chicago’s offense got 10 points worse when Rose was off the floor. Last year our offense was actually a lot better with Monta off the floor, whereas Chicago was still 4 points better with Rose on than off.
It’s just not a good comaprison. Rose is overrated, but he’s definitely quite a bit better than Monta.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions
We get half a point per 100 possessions better actually.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 11, 2011 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes tell us
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Biggest GSW fan in NY!
Get Marc Gasol this summer Lacob!
Coach: Budenholzer or Shaw
Twitter: @GSWarrior9
..............SC30..............
The Mavs are pretty good, aren’t they? And how much does success even matter? If you have a bad roster, that doesn’t mean you’re a bad coach, does it? Plus, especially talking about assistants here….how much impact do they really have on the team, anyways?
by Missing Barry on May 10, 2011 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it’s a valid point to question why Casey seems to be so much more popular than Mike Brown, as his resume as a head coach does not show as much success. It’s also a valid point to throw out those win/loss figures and say, “Who the hell knows?”
Casey took over a Timberwolves team that was similar to the Cavs in that they had one huge star and absolutely nothing else. Now, Garnett’s no LeBron, but Brown’s Cavs did perform much better than Casey’s Wolves. And the sentiment at the time was that Casey underachieved: they’d had better years previously, under Flip Saunders, with similar Garnett-centric rag-tag teams (albeit with slightly better supporting casts, prior to Cassell and Szczerbiak falling off their respective cliffs).
With either guy, we’re working with some very small sample sizes. We don’t know if Brown can successfully coach a LeBronless team; and we don’t know if Casey can successfully coach a team, period.
I’m voting for whichever one gets more excited about all these new advanced stats coming in. We get a vote on this, right?
Formerly ffgolden.
It's a very obvious answer
I think it’s a valid point to question why Casey seems to be so much more popular than Mike Brown, as his resume as a head coach does not show as much success. It’s also a valid point to throw out those win/loss figures and say, "Who the hell knows?"
Lebrons PR people killed Brown for not winning a title.
What I don’t get is, they blamed lack of supporting cast for not having a team that’s strong enough (that’s true) but then it was Brown’s fault for not turning Mo Williams into Scottie Pippen and Anderson Varejao into Horace Grant?
If we bring in a assistant coach I at least want it to be a assistant that was apart of a championship before. If we bring in a guy that has been a head coach before I want him at least to have been in the finals before. There are candidates out there that can fit that description but casey is not 1 of them.
For me -
- if you’re not poaching a top assistant from a really good team (and I’m not sure Casey qualifies) you want a guy who’s had success as a head coach. I think the way you give someone like Casey a second chance (and I think he probably deserves one) is by having him as an assistant so the players trust him.
Better than Smart by a lot.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Ok.
Smart was horrible.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 10, 2011 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Personally I love the way Dallas plays
So Casey is intriguing. The farther they go the hotter his name gets.
BEFORE you bash his Minnesota head coaching experience, I ask you to look at his roster
THis team was 20-20 in the West before he got fired
Starting 5: Mike James, Trenton Hassell, Rickey Davis, Kevin Garnett, Mark Blount.
Ok, my stance is I want a good head coach, and it’s possible to be a very good coach without fitting those criteria.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions
And as far as the Mavs being pretty good this year that means nothing. They was good before Casey got there. They just have a tough center now.
So if it doesn’t mean anything that the Mavs are good….
If we bring in a assistant coach I at least want it to be a assistant that was apart of a championship before.
…why does this mean something?
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions
No it does not because in my opinion they was the same team before he got there. Tyson Chandler and Haywood are the difference in them being as good as they are. Its not like he was around from the beginning like Budenholzer was and watched a team go from the dump to the championship.
So basically what it sounds to me is that your argument is that Casey isn’t the reason they’re good. I’d strongly suggest that pretty much any assistant coach isn’t the reason their team is good or not. Winning a championship has so little to do with an assistant coach, I don’t see how that’s an important criteria for you yet at the same time you go and dismiss someone else on the basis that apparently they aren’t the reason their team is winning?
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Dirk and the Mavs went to the finals before Casey got there. They was a #1 seed before he got there. So no I cant give him any credit for the winning right now. Now if he was around when a team went from the gutter to prominence then id give him credit. But to walk into a winning situation already is not impressive to me.
I understand what you’re getting at, I just don’t see how you can ever really credit any assistant coach for coaching on a winner. Unless you have something very specific to credit to the coach, I just don’t see what’s so important about coaching on a winner. There’s nothing impressive about happening to be on a team that has really good players and a good head coach.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I think your missing my point tho (no pun intended) im not saying a guy can walk into boston as a assistant after they have already established a winning culture and replace thibs like Lawrence Frank has and he becomes credible as a coach. Im not on the Frank bandwagon at all for those reasons. Im saying that in order to show your team and the league that you are turning a page you dont fire your coach for a guy with less stripes than he had. As a Owner I think Lacob is smarter than that or rather im hoping he’s smarter than that. JVG has cred, Sloan has cred, Mike Brown has cred, Larry Brown has cred, Budenholzer has cred, Shaw has cred, There are too many candidates with cred to bring in a guy who has none.
Ok, yes, you are right, we were not discussing the same point.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, yes, Chandler is making a huge difference because he addressed their biggest need.
And Peja seems to have come back from the dead, too.
But have you noticed how good their ball movement is? This is something that is dramatically different about this Mavs team compared to the team we beat in the first round a few years back: they swing the ball around selflessly, and work hard to find players good shots.
It’s a lot of fun to watch.
Now, maybe Casey isn’t the coach responsible for that change, but something in their approach to team offense has improved – and it’s exactly the sort of thing I’d like to see us address.
Actually, their team defense has gotten a lot better, too. They’re a team that starts a couple of players who are not good individual defenders and yet they have a very good team defense.
Shoot. I might be talking myself into wanting Casey as a coach.
But it's not just Kidd.
Have you been watching them?
Kidd might be a part of it, true. But everybody on that team is playing unselfish ball.
And Kidd is a terrible defender at this point in his career, and yet everybody is committed to team defense …
Again, maybe Casey isn’t responsible for these changes, but let’s at least acknowledge that there’s something good going on with the coaches on that team.
What happened to the Brian Shaw movement?
"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 May 10, 2011 7:01 PM PDT reply actions
Most people are expecting that he will just take over for Phil.
by DownGoesFrazier30 on May 10, 2011 7:25 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
That and the triangle offense would be a terrible fit with our roster
by JustSomeName on May 11, 2011 1:43 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Is the triangle really a bad fit?
I see this argument go back and forth and I’m not sure about this. The argument for the triangle is that it ought to give Curry many more open looks, while the argument against it is that it diminishes Curry’s playmaking ability. I say…so what? We have above-average passers and above-average scorers at every position except center (and even then, Biedrins/Udoh do pass fairly well). If I were to rank Curry’s strengths, I would say his shooting is #1, and his passing #2. Shouldn’t the offense be maximizing the strengths of the roster, instead of relying on the secondary strengths of its players? If Curry had the ball, would you rather him shoot it or pass it?
The players most likely to struggle in triangle are Lee (and Biedrins)
No pick and rolls.
You can run pick and rolls out of the triangle. The reason the triangle is a horrible fit is because it absolutely requires effective post play. We don’t have a single player on our roster that can adequately fill that role.
I’m also not sure why the triangle will give Curry many more open looks?
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions
In general ball movement and passing will give Curry open looks
But I think general idea is Triangle will put Curry off ball move. He moves effectively off ball and off screens. If he’s PG he won’t as much.
Anyway, I almost NEVER see Lakers run a PnR. You sure about that? Does Minnesota utilize it?
They run it on a rare occasion, but what it really comes down to is there’s no reason for the Lakers to run PnR. It’s not their team strength.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions
The purpose of the triangle is to give players space for isolation plays.
That’s why it works really well with players like Jordan, Shaq, and Kobe – guys who thrive on one-on-one play. You make it hard for the help to get there on time.
I think the triangle would be great for Monta. It would improve his performance by setting up his isolations – currently when he drives into a set defense, the help is all ready to rush over, and this would address that. By being more structured it might also help his decision-making, as he would have a better sense of where his outlet passes were when the double came.
The problem is that Monta is our only starter, this last year, who thrives in isolations. On the other hand, three of our starters – Dorell, Lee, and Curry, thrive in a movement-based system with lots of cuts, screens, and passing. All three of them would suffer in a system like the triangle, which places a premium on individual moves.
Furthermore, even though Monta is relatively best in isolations, that’s still not his strength. While Monta would do better playing the way he plays in a triangle compared to this last year, he would do better still if he played off-the-ball, relying on his speed to get an advantage on his opponents without the ball, and his teammates passing to get him the ball once he had it. Since we’re a team of very good passers, it makes much more sense to get improvement out of Monta by having him change his game – which is good for everyone – than for having everybody else change theirs.
D'antoni
had the Suns playing great and would be perfect for our roster.
Wanna feel real torture? Try being a Warrior fan.
He had the Suns playing pretty good D when they still had Marion
Wanna feel real torture? Try being a Warrior fan.
That just means Marion was playing D cause he knew how to, not cause dantoni was preaching it, which he obviously doesn't from the looks of the Knicks
by JustSomeName on May 11, 2011 1:42 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
You mean a team featuring Melo and Amare doesn’t play great D? No way! I’m not suer I’ve seen any convincing reason D’Antoni doesn’t care about defense. His teams have traditionally been weak defensively, but he’s traditionally had players that are weak defensively. His teams weren’t going to be good defensively no matter what.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions
I never wanted Dantoni, just replying to luvmydub's reply
I actually agree with you, dantoni teams are never that great defensively which wouldnt be a good fit here
by JustSomeName on May 11, 2011 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions
But my point is it’s not clear D’Antoni has anything to do with the teams weak defenses. He’s had weak defensive players.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
No coach is going to turn our roster into a quality defensive team. We just don’t have the talent for it.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
He’s had weak defensive players.
He’s actually have had some pretty good defenders on those Suns teams. Shawn Marion and Raja Bell come to mind. Hell, even Chauncy Billups, although he’s getting up there in age, isn’t a slouch on defense. But even with these defensive minded players, his teams have always been pretty low on defensive efficiency. It’s cause he was never a head coach to focus on defense. And if the head coach doesn’t focus on defense, the team will never be great defensively.
It works the other way too. Tom Thibs is known to be a defensive whiz even with some suspect defenders (Boozer, Korver, Watson, to name a few, even DRose’s defense is a bit overrated, IMO) on the team, the Bulls are still ranked as the best defensive team in the league this year. It’s cause he focuses on defense. It’s cause of his defensive concepts and his focus on that side of the ball makes it so that his teams will be great defensively.
So basically, offensive coaches will always be great on offense and defensive coaches will always be great on defense.
by JustSomeName on May 11, 2011 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
one word describes my feelings on mike brown: UGH
by DownGoesFrazier30 on May 10, 2011 8:01 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Some Wolves fans describing Casey when he was there
Words like soft spoken were thrown in, defensive guru, bad rotations, not too great but not too bad etc. Really up and down it seems. Similar to Mike Brown ironically.
“Casey is a great defensive coach. He had Rashad McCants playing solid defense, that’s not as easy as it sounds. I think players respect him. He is a bit of a disciplinarian and he will put a player in the doghouse which can get annoying. He is an EXTREMLY hard worker. I read many a story abut how he was always in his office after hours. Some days he slept there. He works his butt off. I get the impression that he’s willing to try new things if something isn’t working as well which I think is a good quality. Too many coaches are stubborn. "
That I really like, but this not so much
Casey makes me wonder about rotations and his relationship with players. I don’t think players dislike him but I don’t know if they love him either. He has been known to put put players in the doghouse and kind of bury them. I don’t know if he does that often but he has done it before, it’s not like he did it without any reason though.
Casey was a good defensive guy but players complained that he didn’t communicate with them and by the end of his stint here he had well and truly lost that lockerroom.
He seems smart and hard working but his player connections seem a bit off
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
"If you're ever in a fair fight, then your tactics suck." ಠ_ಠ
This won’t fly with Warriors fans.
he will put a player in the doghouse
by Slightly Hyphy on May 10, 2011 9:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Source
http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=27927853
Also Cavs fans on Brown
He has one of the best defensive principles in the league at par with Tom Thiboudeau (sp?). However, he is the worst in coaching in the fly. That’s basically him, IMO.
Mike Brown is not good at molding young individual players.
I loved Mike Brown but other than his anemic offense, he didn’t come through in the clutch when a playoff game or series turned into coach vs. coach.
Mike Brown is a good regular season coach. He’ll get teams to overachieve because he will beat them over the head with defense. However, when the playoffs roll around and everybody brings defensive intensity, his warts show. He knows little to nothing about offensive execution and never seems to find the right buttons to push in game.
I don’t think you want him on a young team. He’s one dimensional and will clash with young players who fail to grasp his defensive system.
So he has the defense we need but the fit may seem off in some places
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
"If you're ever in a fair fight, then your tactics suck." ಠ_ಠ
Forgot source again
http://realcavsfans.com/showthread.php?36585-Rockets-fan-with-question-about-Mike-Brown
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
"If you're ever in a fair fight, then your tactics suck." ಠ_ಠ
Let’s also keep in mind the possibility that coaches might actually improve from one stint to the next. Failure can be a great teaching lesson.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions
RICK ADELMAN
IS A BOSS
by Hundredthousanddollarpluswhipmaster on May 10, 2011 9:20 PM PDT reply actions
To give Brown the benefit of the doubt, he never really had a versatile offensive weapon besides LeBron
With a player as great as LeBron, Brown felt like he had to pretty much ride his back all the way for the team to have a chance to contend for a title. Here he would have multiple guys who can score. Ellis or Curry for sure would have been better scoring options than any of the other players besides LeBron on those Cavs teams, and sadly Wright, Lee, or maybe even Reggie very well could have been the 2nd options on those teams. Maybe having more of a balanced offense he would utilize more player and spread the ball around, rather than call a ton of plays for Ellis. I could be wrong, but you have to look at what he had to work with.
How bout Bruce Bochy? ;)
by DownGoesFrazier30 on May 10, 2011 9:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Not to beat a dead horse but Casey has to have the thinnest resume of all the candidates. If Dallas was eliminated already would we even be talking about him? They overthrow the Lakers now everybody wants Casey. I’ll go pickett the Warriors front office if they hire Casey. Anybody with me?
Let's just hope the Rockets hire him
I’m crossing my fingers and saying my prayers tonight.
by David Leezy on May 10, 2011 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I like Casey has some experience as a head coach. He did a pretty good job with them. He’s now been an assistant on a top team. He probably knows what to do better the 2nd time around, and has good philisophical ideas.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on May 11, 2011 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Coaching with Pete Newell is a huge + in my book.
by Missing Barry on May 11, 2011 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions
I like Casey, he was an assistant in Seattle and I always thought he was one of the better assistant coaches in the league.
I don’t, however, think he’s a head coach. He’s great to have on your staff, diagramming your defense, but he lacks the ego management skills to be the lead guy. A lot like Lawrence Frank, really.
by Spider Jerusalem on May 11, 2011 2:30 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Why does Lebron get a pass for terrible supporting cast but not Brown?
After the Cavs disaster season, there seems to be a big agreement that Lebron has been vindicated for not bringing home a championship because the team is so bad once he leaves.
As for Brown, he sucks because he had one of the top two players in the league and didn’t achieve enough playoff success.
Looking back, I’d expect Brown & Lebron to either share blame or both to be vindicated.
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
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- 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
