The Sacramento Queens Have Fired Mike Malone

[Lakers+USC=#1]

If the goal is to win championship's and the team gets no farther than they did under the previous coach, it's a wash. It doesn't matter how much better the team appears to be in the regular season if it doesn't translate to playoff success.

If GSW makes it farther than they did under Jackson, then you can point to improvement. Under Del Harris, the Lakers, who had gone through a couple of down years, became a very good regular season team, but couldn't get past the 2nd round of the playoffs. That's why the switch was made to Phil. However, if Phil came in and couldn't get the Lakers any further than Harris had, it would have been a wash.

Kerr was brought in because the Warriors FO believed that Jackson had taken them as far as he was going to. People can bring up personality issues, offensive system or whatever they want, but if the Warriors FO believed Jackson could get them where they want to go, he'd still be the coach.

This "the West is so deep" is pretty much an excuse in case the Warriors don't make it any farther. Bottom line is, if they have the coach and roster to win the Western Conference, they will. If not, they won't.

Now this man deserves an A++

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm willing to give it 2 years atleast before I judge. But I believe this team can win 60+ games and go to the conference finals and maybe the finals. We will see. The first step should be to get to the conference finals.

I think that's fair and I agree that the Warriors can accomplish what you believe they can. The problem they have is that there are about 5 other teams in the West who can make the same claim. You can make a great case for any of the top 5 or 6 teams in the West being favored in a championship series vs. whoever may come out of the East.

Personally, I hope the Warriors continue to have the success they are and wouldn't mind seeing them get a title (since the Lakers aren't). It's been a long time and they are a blast to watch.

 

[wildturkey]

If the goal is to win championship's and the team gets no farther than they did under the previous coach, it's a wash. It doesn't matter how much better the team appears to be in the regular season if it doesn't translate to playoff success.

If GSW makes it farther than they did under Jackson, then you can point to improvement. Under Del Harris, the Lakers, who had gone through a couple of down years, became a very good regular season team, but couldn't get past the 2nd round of the playoffs. That's why the switch was made to Phil. However, if Phil came in and couldn't get the Lakers any further than Harris had, it would have been a wash.

Kerr was brought in because the Warriors FO believed that Jackson had taken them as far as he was going to. People can bring up personality issues, offensive system or whatever they want, but if the Warriors FO believed Jackson could get them where they want to go, he'd still be the coach.

This "the West is so deep" is pretty much an excuse in case the Warriors don't make it any farther. Bottom line is, if they have the coach and roster to win the Western Conference, they will. If not, they won't.

I don't see how you can call it a wash just based on championship or bust or advancing one further round. A wash makes it sound like since there is no discernible difference in outcome so what difference does it make who the coach is? But there's much more that goes into that lofty championship goal. There are many factors that go into winning a championship, some that you can control and some that you can't. You can have a team that's actually better this year but not accomplish the same record of success as a previous roster iteration. The measure you're looking for if you're management is if you've improved your own personal chances of winning, ie all the stuff you can control (max out players, better offense/defense, etc). "The West is so deep" isn't an excuse. It's reality. The Ws made a move to get better and so far, have been better. But its also a realistic possibility that they could be a better team and still not advance farther than they have in the past. That's not a wash so much as it is the facts of life in the NBA.

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't see how you can call it a wash just based on championship or bust or advancing one further round. A wash makes it sound like since there is no discernible difference in outcome so what difference does it make who the coach is? But there's much more that goes into that lofty championship goal. There are many factors that go into winning a championship, some that you can control and some that you can't. You can have a team that's actually better this year but not accomplish the same record of success as a previous roster iteration. The measure you're looking for if you're management is if you've improved your own personal chances of winning, ie all the stuff you can control (max out players, better offense/defense, etc). "The West is so deep" isn't an excuse. It's reality. The Ws made a move to get better and so far, have been better. But its also a realistic possibility that they could be a better team and still not advance farther than they have in the past. That's not a wash so much as it is the facts of life in the NBA.

The goal is to win a championship or at least show steps in that direction. That was the point of changing coaches. If they don't advance any further then Jackson took them, it's a wash until they do. It doesn't mean it will always mean it's a wash. If they advance no further this year, it's a wash. But if they advance further next year, it no longer is.

"The West is so deep" is absolutely an excuse. If they have the right roster and the right coach and play at a high enough level in the playoffs, they'll come out of the West. If they don't, they won't.

There are no "moral victories" and teams don't get banners for winning the regular season.

 

[wildturkey]

The goal is to win a championship or at least show steps in that direction. That was the point of changing coaches. If they don't advance any further then Jackson took them, it's a wash until they do. It doesn't mean it will always mean it's a wash. If they advance no further this year, it's a wash. But if they advance further next year, it no longer is.

"The West is so deep" is absolutely an excuse. If they have the right roster and the right coach and play at a high enough level in the playoffs, they'll come out of the West. If they don't, they won't.

There are no "moral victories" and teams don't get banners for winning the regular season.

That's oversimplifying things. We fans often just view things that way but organizations measure success in more detail. There's only 1 champion after all. That doesn't mean 29 other teams had a failure of a season if they didn't win it.

Plus, getting rid of Jackson wasn't all a basketball move. A very large part of it was the personality clashes between him, the owner, and the employees of the Warriors. The owner and management wanted things done a certain way and wanted more input or at least open dialogue with the on court product. Jackson's style was very much like a dictatorship in that it was his way only and he didn't want to hear anything else. So they dumped him in favor a person that would be more open to them. And in that respect, the move is already a success regardless of record.

And a funny little FYI, they do hand out banners for the regular season. Lots of teams have "division winner" banners.

 

[trojanfan12]

That's oversimplifying things. We fans often just view things that way but organizations measure success in more detail. There's only 1 champion after all. That doesn't mean 29 other teams had a failure of a season if they didn't win it.

Plus, getting rid of Jackson wasn't all a basketball move. A very large part of it was the personality clashes between him, the owner, and the employees of the Warriors. The owner and management wanted things done a certain way and wanted more input or at least open dialogue with the on court product. Jackson's style was very much like a dictatorship in that it was his way only and he didn't want to hear anything else. So they dumped him in favor a person that would be more open to them. And in that respect, the move is already a success regardless of record.

And a funny little FYI, they do hand out banners for the regular season. Lots of teams have "division winner" banners.

I disagree. Some organizations are about measuring success in championships, that's why they win them. The Lakers are that type of franchise, so are the Spurs and the Celtics are trying to get back to that. Teams can measure success by whether or not their coach is a "nice guy" or "listens to them" if they want, but that's not success when it doesn't result in a championship.

When Del Harris was the Lakers coach, from all reports, he was a helluva nice guy. Listened to his players, etc., etc. All of that led to zero titles. They fired him and brought in Phil whose ego basically overshadowed the entire organization and who also wanted everything done his way. The result was 7 finals appearances and 5 championships.

As for teams that have "division winner" banners. Yeah, that's for teams like the Kings and Clippers who have never won a real championship so their fans can feel better about their team. I don't see the Lakers, Celtics or Spurs putting up division winner banners.

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

That's the problem with these owners now days. They want this certain style or that style. Let the damn coach, coach!

 

[Hambombs]

That's oversimplifying things. We fans often just view things that way but organizations measure success in more detail. There's only 1 champion after all. That doesn't mean 29 other teams had a failure of a season if they didn't win it.

Plus, getting rid of Jackson wasn't all a basketball move. A very large part of it was the personality clashes between him, the owner, and the employees of the Warriors. The owner and management wanted things done a certain way and wanted more input or at least open dialogue with the on court product. Jackson's style was very much like a dictatorship in that it was his way only and he didn't want to hear anything else. So they dumped him in favor a person that would be more open to them. And in that respect, the move is already a success regardless of record.

And a funny little FYI, they do hand out banners for the regular season. Lots of teams have "division winner" banners.

It was mostly a basketball move but Jackson also didn't want to get any good assistant coaches to help him out cause he obviously needed it. Management also wanted a smart tactician basketball mind. Which is why they went and got Kerr then Kerr got the best coaching staff he can. Now you can see what golden state is doing with a top end staff and a better system implemented.

 

[wildturkey]

I disagree. Some organizations are about measuring success in championships, that's why they win them. The Lakers are that type of franchise, so are the Spurs and the Celtics are trying to get back to that. Teams can measure success by whether or not their coach is a "nice guy" or "listens to them" if they want, but that's not success when it doesn't result in a championship.

When Del Harris was the Lakers coach, from all reports, he was a helluva nice guy. Listened to his players, etc., etc. All of that led to zero titles. They fired him and brought in Phil whose ego basically overshadowed the entire organization and who also wanted everything done his way. The result was 7 finals appearances and 5 championships.

As for teams that have "division winner" banners. Yeah, that's for teams like the Kings and Clippers who have never won a real championship so their fans can feel better about their team. I don't see the Lakers, Celtics or Spurs putting up division winner banners.

You're not disagreeing so much as you are refusing to acknowledge that teams do in fact measure success and improvement beyond just championships. Here, I'll give you some examples to show you why you just can't say things are a wash because the Warriors end result might be the same. 2 years ago, the Suns were a 20 win team but missed the playoffs. Last year, they won 48 games but missed the playoffs. Would you say they didn't have a more successful year or were better because the end result was them missing the playoffs, thus making it a "wash"? Maybe you would, but I think most people would agree the Suns were a better team. Now, apply this to the Warriors. Last year, they won 51 games, had a top 10 rated defense and a top 15 rated offense,finished 2nd in the division and lost in the first round. This year, they're playing very well so let's project what they're on pace for to the end of the year and say they finish with 60 wins, have a top 10 rated defense (currently 1st) and a top 10 rated offense (currently 8th), win the division (currently leading), but still lose in the first round (which could very well be OKC or even the Spurs right now). How is that a wash when you improve on everything but the final result?

You also totally misinterpreted the nice guy bit with Jackson/Kerr. What I was referring to was that was part of the reason Jackson was fired. It's the business part of team activities (and NBA teams are very much a business organization). Sometimes you're doing well but you have personality clashes with people and for the overall long term health and moral, you fire a person just because the fit wasn't quite right. That was part of the reason of Jackson's firing and if things in that aspect are better with Kerr, then its already a success for them.

And here's a link (too big to post) to a picture for you.Check the two on the far right :P

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Spurs_championship_banners.jpg

 

[True Lakers Fan]

You're not disagreeing so much as you are refusing to acknowledge that teams do in fact measure success and improvement beyond just championships. Here, I'll give you some examples to show you why you just can't say things are a wash because the Warriors end result might be the same. 2 years ago, the Suns were a 20 win team but missed the playoffs. Last year, they won 48 games but missed the playoffs. Would you say they didn't have a more successful year or were better because the end result was them missing the playoffs, thus making it a "wash"? Maybe you would, but I think most people would agree the Suns were a better team. Now, apply this to the Warriors. Last year, they won 51 games, had a top 10 rated defense and a top 15 rated offense,finished 2nd in the division and lost in the first round. This year, they're playing very well so let's project what they're on pace for to the end of the year and say they finish with 60 wins, have a top 10 rated defense (currently 1st) and a top 10 rated offense (currently 8th), win the division (currently leading), but still lose in the first round (which could very well be OKC or even the Spurs right now). How is that a wash when you improve on everything but the final result?

You also totally misinterpreted the nice guy bit with Jackson/Kerr. What I was referring to was that was part of the reason Jackson was fired. It's the business part of team activities (and NBA teams are very much a business organization). Sometimes you're doing well but you have personality clashes with people and for the overall long term health and moral, you fire a person just because the fit wasn't quite right. That was part of the reason of Jackson's firing and if things in that aspect are better with Kerr, then its already a success for them.

And here's a link (too big to post) to a picture for you.Check the two on the far right :P

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Spurs_championship_banners.jpg

He's partly right though because at the end of the day, the Suns did improve, but not enough to do anything respectable. Every team in the league is interested in a championship and anything less is a failure to them - that's just how they think for the most part. Only a loser fails to believe in the impossible dream

 

[wildturkey]

There's some Twitter buzz going that Mark Jackson could be close to taking the Kings job

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

Wildturkey, the Suns and Warriors example you gave, are different from each other.

A bad team winning 20 games, then winning 48 games and not making the playoffs, is an improvement. They went from a bad team, to basically a playoff team that just missed the playoffs by a game or two. They made the next step. Now, if you win 50 games and lose in the first round to winning 60 games and lose in the first round again next year, then its a wash because you didn't make that next step. When you are a good team, you are judged in the playoffs. Year, you can improve your number of wins in the regular season, but what good does that do if you are keep going to lose, in the same round.

 

[trojanfan12]

You're not disagreeing so much as you are refusing to acknowledge that teams do in fact measure success and improvement beyond just championships. Here, I'll give you some examples to show you why you just can't say things are a wash because the Warriors end result might be the same. 2 years ago, the Suns were a 20 win team but missed the playoffs. Last year, they won 48 games but missed the playoffs. Would you say they didn't have a more successful year or were better because the end result was them missing the playoffs, thus making it a "wash"? Maybe you would, but I think most people would agree the Suns were a better team. Now, apply this to the Warriors. Last year, they won 51 games, had a top 10 rated defense and a top 15 rated offense,finished 2nd in the division and lost in the first round. This year, they're playing very well so let's project what they're on pace for to the end of the year and say they finish with 60 wins, have a top 10 rated defense (currently 1st) and a top 10 rated offense (currently 8th), win the division (currently leading), but still lose in the first round (which could very well be OKC or even the Spurs right now). How is that a wash when you improve on everything but the final result?

You also totally misinterpreted the nice guy bit with Jackson/Kerr. What I was referring to was that was part of the reason Jackson was fired. It's the business part of team activities (and NBA teams are very much a business organization). Sometimes you're doing well but you have personality clashes with people and for the overall long term health and moral, you fire a person just because the fit wasn't quite right. That was part of the reason of Jackson's firing and if things in that aspect are better with Kerr, then its already a success for them.

And here's a link (too big to post) to a picture for you.Check the two on the far right :P

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Spurs_championship_banners.jpg

No, I'm disagreeing. You just don't like that I have higher standards for success. Some teams have higher expectations than others. Thanks, but I'm not going to be a fan of a team that considers anything less than a championship to be a successful season. I don't want my team hanging "division champions" banners or thinking that winning a few more regular season games makes for a successful season. I'll leave that to teams that don't win championships.

Look at the Lakers this season. I know they aren't even making the playoffs, let alone winning a championship. If I see the team playing hard, improving and buying into Byron's system, I will be pleased with the progress, but I will not consider it to be a successful season.

Sorry, I'm just never going to buy into the "everybody gets a trophy and if you tried your successful" mindset.

 

[bksballer89]

GSW will never win a title with the roster constructed the way it is.

When you have pure jump shooters as your best players you aren't going anywhere.

Basically all of their best offensive players are jumpshooters except Lee.

I don't see them beating a healthy OKC, SAS, or Memphis in a series

 

[Hambombs]

There's some Twitter buzz going that Mark Jackson could be close to taking the Kings job

Lol. That's going to be interesting cause I go to a kings okc game on jan 7th

 

[Hambombs]

GSW will never win a title with the roster constructed the way it is.

When you have pure jump shooters as your best players you aren't going anywhere.

Basically all of their best offensive players are jumpshooters except Lee.

I don't see them beating a healthy OKC, SAS, or Memphis in a series

Ok Charles Barkley LOL

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

GSW will never win a title with the roster constructed the way it is.

When you have pure jump shooters as your best players you aren't going anywhere.

Basically all of their best offensive players are jumpshooters except Lee.

I don't see them beating a healthy OKC, SAS, or Memphis in a series

Exactly how I feel.

 

[Hambombs]

GSW will never win a title with the roster constructed the way it is.

When you have pure jump shooters as your best players you aren't going anywhere.

Basically all of their best offensive players are jumpshooters except Lee.

I don't see them beating a healthy OKC, SAS, or Memphis in a series

I see them beating any team in a 7 games series with bogut and curry healthy. They have enough to win it all imo. Excellent defensive team with a good offensive system intact. Guess what! Spurs one with the best 3pt shooting in the game.! They're good enough to win the title. Only flaw is health and a back up big. They also need more shooting off the bench

 

[bksballer89]

They're best players never depended on the 3 ball nearly as much as steph & curry. Most of their 3s came from role players which is fine. Parker, Leonard, & Duncan obviously aren't guys who rely on the 3 ball

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

I see them beating any team in a 7 games series with bogut and curry healthy. They have enough to win it all imo. Excellent defensive team with a good offensive system intact. Guess what! Spurs one with the best 3pt shooting in the game.! They're good enough to win the title. Only flaw is health and a back up big. They also need more shooting off the bench

It's not just about having a good 3pt fg% that the Spurs have, they also can slow it down and play inside. I will have more faith, when Bogut comes back and stay healthy for the playoffs.