Around the League: Playoffs

[SDC]

sacramento should just hire david blatt. he'll be a great coach for cousins, and an even better one if the kings decide to trade boogie away and start rebuilding under blatt's specifications.

[Hermen]

Do you think Blatt would take SAC over GSW assistant position? I mean, SAC isn't exactly known for being good to their coaches and he was in one coach unfriendly position already in Cleveland. Meanwhile GSW assistants are highly desired apparently.
EDIT: Knicks I think also like Blatt, but I'd guess they are somewhere close to SAC in coach friendliness with Dolan and Jackson.

[ShelC]

Hornacek's not tough enough for Sacramento. Not knocking him, but that's the reality of it. I've seen Ewing's name mentioned and I feel like Sacramento would be a nice shot for him, coaching Cousins. I don't think the coach matters tho as long as Vivek is meddling. He's got a top, young post big man but wants to run and play like GS. Not gon' work!

I also think the Knicks are just paying Blatt lip service for the media and because he has ties to Mills. For all of Phil's triangle nonsense, if that's the way he wants to play, let him hire his guys and live or die with it. Go with Shaw/Rambis/Cleamons and other former Bulls/Lakers guys like Ron Harper and pound the triangle into the players. But don't mix and match and hire one guy, with Rambis as "offensive coordinator" because it won't work. Besides, if you're the Knicks, would you really want LBJ chirping in Melo's ear about Blatt or Melo doubting Blatt from the start bc LeBron never respected him?

[JustWinBaby]

Not to continue to be negative on Watson but the use of John Wooden as reference point is purely name dropping. Lavin was his coach and Wooden was about 100 years old while sitting in the stands. As I remember Wooden really stepped away from any true involvement in the UCLA team after he retired from coaching.

You are totally incorrect.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-co ... 15637.html

http://www.nba.com/spurs/earl-watsons-pyramid-success

OK, so he spent time with Wooden. It appears like they spent their time talking about the birds and the bees, which is not a bad thing.

The question is, why did the Suns immediately hire Bob Hill to support Watson on the bench last season. I also believe they will be looking to add a good x's and o's assistant for next season? It just seems like we hired a guy not ready to be a head coach.

I would think that x's and o's would be his biggest strength based on his background as a player and after his weekly or daily visits with Wooden. They had to talk about basketball at some point, didn't they?

I guess that knowing x's and o's in no longer a required skill of a head coach. Phil Jackson always had Tex Winters by his side while winning all of those championships with the Triangle and Kerr brought in Gentry to help him with the details of MDA's offense. Both Jackson and Kerr have been extremely successful. Maybe we got it right. All we have needed is a little love and leadership.

I still see no reason that we would not reach out to Walton and I think in the end the Lakers got the better coach. We will see.

[Indy]

Not to continue to be negative on Watson but the use of John Wooden as reference point is purely name dropping. Lavin was his coach and Wooden was about 100 years old while sitting in the stands. As I remember Wooden really stepped away from any true involvement in the UCLA team after he retired from coaching.

You are totally incorrect.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-co ... 15637.html

http://www.nba.com/spurs/earl-watsons-pyramid-success

OK, so he spent time with Wooden. It appears like they spent their time talking about the birds and the bees, which is not a bad thing.

The question is, why did the Suns immediately hire Bob Hill to support Watson on the bench last season. I also believe they will be looking to add a good x's and o's assistant for next season? It just seems like we hired a guy not ready to be a head coach.

I would think that x's and o's would be his biggest strength based on his background as a player and after his weekly or daily visits with Wooden. They had to talk about basketball at some point, didn't they?

I guess that knowing x's and o's in no longer a required skill of a head coach. Phil Jackson always had Tex Winters by his side while winning all of those championships with the Triangle and Kerr brought in Gentry to help him with the details of MDA's offense. Both Jackson and Kerr have been extremely successful. Maybe we got it right. All we have needed is a little love and leadership.

I still see no reason that we would not reach out to Walton and I think in the end the Lakers got the better coach. We will see.

I think you answered a lot of your own questions with the Phil and Kerr comments. As for the bolded part, I am with you on the first part. Our process was stupid. As for the last, right now I expect Walton to have a better career as a coach, but I have no idea if he will be a better coach. That might sound contradictory, but I think whomever was coaching the Lakers after Kobe left would have a top 3 destination team for FAs, and more money than nearly anyone to spend on them. So that person is certainly at an advantage, regardless of their coaching chops.

[carey]

https://twitter.com/BillSimmons/status/727885642118529024 https://twitter.com/BillSimmons/status/727886053407760384

[carey]

LSU's Simmons tops list of pliable talent in frontcourt: http://www.nba.com/news/features/david_ ... index.html

David Aldridge's Big Board 2016: Power Forwards

RANK | NAME | SCHOOL/TEAM | CLASS/AGE | HT | WT > PROJECTED
1. Ben Simmons | LSU | Freshman | 6-10 | 240 > High Lottery
2. Dragan Bender | Maccabi Tel Aviv | 18 | 7-0 | 216 > High Lottery
3. Henry Ellenson | Marquette | Freshman | 6-11 | 245 > Late Lottery
4. Marquese Chriss | Washington | Freshman | 6-9 | 225 > Mid First
5. Juan Hernangomez | Estudiantes | 20 | 6-9 | 230 > Mid-Late First
6. Skal Labissiere | Kentucky | Freshman | 6-11 | 225 > Mid-Late First
7. Domatas Sabonis | Gonzaga | Sophomore | 6-11 | 240 | Mid-Late First
8. Deyonta Davis | Michigan State | Freshman | 6-10 | 240 | Mid-Late First
9. Brice Johnson | North Carolina | Senior | 6-10 | 230 | Late First/Early Second
10. Gerschon Yabusele | Rouen (France) | 20 | 6-7 | 240 | Late First/Early Second

[JustWinBaby]

Not to continue to be negative on Watson but the use of John Wooden as reference point is purely name dropping. Lavin was his coach and Wooden was about 100 years old while sitting in the stands. As I remember Wooden really stepped away from any true involvement in the UCLA team after he retired from coaching.

You are totally incorrect.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-co ... 15637.html

http://www.nba.com/spurs/earl-watsons-pyramid-success

OK, so he spent time with Wooden. It appears like they spent their time talking about the birds and the bees, which is not a bad thing.

The question is, why did the Suns immediately hire Bob Hill to support Watson on the bench last season. I also believe they will be looking to add a good x's and o's assistant for next season? It just seems like we hired a guy not ready to be a head coach.

I would think that x's and o's would be his biggest strength based on his background as a player and after his weekly or daily visits with Wooden. They had to talk about basketball at some point, didn't they?

I guess that knowing x's and o's in no longer a required skill of a head coach. Phil Jackson always had Tex Winters by his side while winning all of those championships with the Triangle and Kerr brought in Gentry to help him with the details of MDA's offense. Both Jackson and Kerr have been extremely successful. Maybe we got it right. All we have needed is a little love and leadership.

I still see no reason that we would not reach out to Walton and I think in the end the Lakers got the better coach. We will see.

I think you answered a lot of your own questions with the Phil and Kerr comments. As for the bolded part, I am with you on the first part. Our process was stupid. As for the last, right now I expect Walton to have a better career as a coach, but I have no idea if he will be a better coach. That might sound contradictory, but I think whomever was coaching the Lakers after Kobe left would have a top 3 destination team for FAs, and more money than nearly anyone to spend on them. So that person is certainly at an advantage, regardless of their coaching chops.

Certainly the franchise is probably the most important factor in attracting free agents and it certainly appears that we are at the bottom of the list. Most of the blame was and should be put on Robert Sarver. I believe though that the head coach has some skin in the game as well. The great coaches have always seemed to end up with the best talent while attracting those additional role players to make their teams great. I believe that is one of the strengths we think we are getting with the Watson hire. Watson is supposed to be well respected around the league. I think Walton is well respected as well. Certainly the Lakers will have the edge in free agency but I think we should be able to attract someone that can help. I will be disappointed if we don't.

I think the bar should be set for Watson at the .500 level. I believe we should be able to accomplish that goal based on a healthy roster and great coaching. Depending on what happens this summer the Lakers could be very good or very bad. I have no idea where to set the bar for them/Walton at this point.

Watson could end up being a better coach than Walton and I hope he does. At this point though I would prefer Walton. Just my opinion and I an probably wrong, so be it.

[carey]

https://twitter.com/IAmDPick/status/727987073706135552

[Indy]

Not to continue to be negative on Watson but the use of John Wooden as reference point is purely name dropping. Lavin was his coach and Wooden was about 100 years old while sitting in the stands. As I remember Wooden really stepped away from any true involvement in the UCLA team after he retired from coaching.

You are totally incorrect.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-co ... 15637.html

http://www.nba.com/spurs/earl-watsons-pyramid-success

OK, so he spent time with Wooden. It appears like they spent their time talking about the birds and the bees, which is not a bad thing.

The question is, why did the Suns immediately hire Bob Hill to support Watson on the bench last season. I also believe they will be looking to add a good x's and o's assistant for next season? It just seems like we hired a guy not ready to be a head coach.

I would think that x's and o's would be his biggest strength based on his background as a player and after his weekly or daily visits with Wooden. They had to talk about basketball at some point, didn't they?

I guess that knowing x's and o's in no longer a required skill of a head coach. Phil Jackson always had Tex Winters by his side while winning all of those championships with the Triangle and Kerr brought in Gentry to help him with the details of MDA's offense. Both Jackson and Kerr have been extremely successful. Maybe we got it right. All we have needed is a little love and leadership.

I still see no reason that we would not reach out to Walton and I think in the end the Lakers got the better coach. We will see.

I think you answered a lot of your own questions with the Phil and Kerr comments. As for the bolded part, I am with you on the first part. Our process was stupid. As for the last, right now I expect Walton to have a better career as a coach, but I have no idea if he will be a better coach. That might sound contradictory, but I think whomever was coaching the Lakers after Kobe left would have a top 3 destination team for FAs, and more money than nearly anyone to spend on them. So that person is certainly at an advantage, regardless of their coaching chops.

Certainly the franchise is probably the most important factor in attracting free agents and it certainly appears that we are at the bottom of the list. Most of the blame was and should be put on Robert Sarver. I believe though that the head coach has some skin in the game as well. The great coaches have always seemed to end up with the best talent while attracting those additional role players to make their teams great. I believe that is one of the strengths we think we are getting with the Watson hire. Watson is supposed to be well respected around the league. I think Walton is well respected as well. Certainly the Lakers will have the edge in free agency but I think we should be able to attract someone that can help. I will be disappointed if we don't.

I think the bar should be set for Watson at the .500 level. I believe we should be able to accomplish that goal based on a healthy roster and great coaching. Depending on what happens this summer the Lakers could be very good or very bad. I have no idea where to set the bar for them/Walton at this point.

Watson could end up being a better coach than Walton and I hope he does. At this point though I would prefer Walton. Just my opinion and I an probably wrong, so be it.

I think that if we keep our roster as is (which means adding a ho-hum PF when Mirza and Leuer sign somewhere, and finding a D-league backup PG), just adding our draft this year (assuming we don't trade anything away), I think 41 wins is high over-achievement. I am thinking the expectations are around 33-38 games.

If we can do that exact same thing but also find a way to turn Bledsoe and Knight into a run-of-the-mill PG and a solid PF, I think .500 is fair game.

[Superbone]

I think that if we keep our roster as is (which means adding a ho-hum PF when Mirza and Leuer sign somewhere, and finding a D-league backup PG), just adding our draft this year (assuming we don't trade anything away), I think 41 wins is high over-achievement. I am thinking the expectations are around 33-38 games.

If we can do that exact same thing but also find a way to turn Bledsoe and Knight into a run-of-the-mill PG and a solid PF, I think .500 is fair game.

That sounds about right to me.

[TOO]

I think that if we keep our roster as is (which means adding a ho-hum PF when Mirza and Leuer sign somewhere, and finding a D-league backup PG), just adding our draft this year (assuming we don't trade anything away), I think 41 wins is high over-achievement. I am thinking the expectations are around 33-38 games.

If we can do that exact same thing but also find a way to turn Bledsoe and Knight into a run-of-the-mill PG and a solid PF, I think .500 is fair game.

That sounds about right to me.

We'd win 60 with Luke Walton.

[OE32]

Looking at those shots of Bled and Knight working out - you can see a calendar in the background of one of the pics. Knight's worked out every day this month, apparently. 1 for Bled, Archie and Tele each.

Maybe Knight really is falling in love with the process. Gotta admit, that backcourt is stacked on paper.

[carey]

Looking at those shots of Bled and Knight working out - you can see a calendar in the background of one of the pics. Knight's worked out every day this month, apparently. 1 for Bled, Archie and Tele each.

Maybe Knight really is falling in love with the process. Gotta admit, that backcourt is stacked on paper.

Knight has always been an extremely hard worker. He's also very intelligent. He would have been an academic senior in just his second year at Kentucky and graduated high school with a 4.3 gpa. I often wonder about the difference between "book smarts" and "basketball smarts." There's no reason a guy like him should make the foolish mistakes he does on the court, yet we see it time and time again.

[carey]

https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/728041929422725120 Bad fit, imho.

[TOO]

I'm not sure there is a coach out there that can get Harden to buy into his system.

[Indy]

I'm not sure there is a coach out there that can get Harden to buy into his system.

If by "his" you mean Harden's, it should be easy...

[Indy]

Looking at those shots of Bled and Knight working out - you can see a calendar in the background of one of the pics. Knight's worked out every day this month, apparently. 1 for Bled, Archie and Tele each.

Maybe Knight really is falling in love with the process. Gotta admit, that backcourt is stacked on paper.

His dedication has never been the issue. Or, like carey said, his intelligence. The problem is that 2 teams bailed on him DESPITE his hard work, dedication, and intelligence. And from what we saw in his 15 months here, we want to bail on him too. At some point, being a 6'3" chucker, that can't defend a chair, plays 35 mpg, and doesn't make your team better stops being palatable. Oh, and shoot 36% from 3 and <42% from the field. Come to think of it, he is basically Gerald Green on an average year, not his career year when he first came to Phoenix. But makes $70M. And was a high 1st round pick.

[JustWinBaby]

You are totally incorrect.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-co ... 15637.html

http://www.nba.com/spurs/earl-watsons-pyramid-success

OK, so he spent time with Wooden. It appears like they spent their time talking about the birds and the bees, which is not a bad thing.

The question is, why did the Suns immediately hire Bob Hill to support Watson on the bench last season. I also believe they will be looking to add a good x's and o's assistant for next season? It just seems like we hired a guy not ready to be a head coach.

I would think that x's and o's would be his biggest strength based on his background as a player and after his weekly or daily visits with Wooden. They had to talk about basketball at some point, didn't they?

I guess that knowing x's and o's in no longer a required skill of a head coach. Phil Jackson always had Tex Winters by his side while winning all of those championships with the Triangle and Kerr brought in Gentry to help him with the details of MDA's offense. Both Jackson and Kerr have been extremely successful. Maybe we got it right. All we have needed is a little love and leadership.

I still see no reason that we would not reach out to Walton and I think in the end the Lakers got the better coach. We will see.

I think you answered a lot of your own questions with the Phil and Kerr comments. As for the bolded part, I am with you on the first part. Our process was stupid. As for the last, right now I expect Walton to have a better career as a coach, but I have no idea if he will be a better coach. That might sound contradictory, but I think whomever was coaching the Lakers after Kobe left would have a top 3 destination team for FAs, and more money than nearly anyone to spend on them. So that person is certainly at an advantage, regardless of their coaching chops.

Certainly the franchise is probably the most important factor in attracting free agents and it certainly appears that we are at the bottom of the list. Most of the blame was and should be put on Robert Sarver. I believe though that the head coach has some skin in the game as well. The great coaches have always seemed to end up with the best talent while attracting those additional role players to make their teams great. I believe that is one of the strengths we think we are getting with the Watson hire. Watson is supposed to be well respected around the league. I think Walton is well respected as well. Certainly the Lakers will have the edge in free agency but I think we should be able to attract someone that can help. I will be disappointed if we don't.

I think the bar should be set for Watson at the .500 level. I believe we should be able to accomplish that goal based on a healthy roster and great coaching. Depending on what happens this summer the Lakers could be very good or very bad. I have no idea where to set the bar for them/Walton at this point.

Watson could end up being a better coach than Walton and I hope he does. At this point though I would prefer Walton. Just my opinion and I an probably wrong, so be it.

I think that if we keep our roster as is (which means adding a ho-hum PF when Mirza and Leuer sign somewhere, and finding a D-league backup PG), just adding our draft this year (assuming we don't trade anything away), I think 41 wins is high over-achievement. I am thinking the expectations are around 33-38 games.

If we can do that exact same thing but also find a way to turn Bledsoe and Knight into a run-of-the-mill PG and a solid PF, I think .500 is fair game.

In all due respect if Watson cannot turn our $140 mil back court into consistent productive players why in the hell did we hire him?

[Indy]

OK, so he spent time with Wooden. It appears like they spent their time talking about the birds and the bees, which is not a bad thing.

The question is, why did the Suns immediately hire Bob Hill to support Watson on the bench last season. I also believe they will be looking to add a good x's and o's assistant for next season? It just seems like we hired a guy not ready to be a head coach.

I would think that x's and o's would be his biggest strength based on his background as a player and after his weekly or daily visits with Wooden. They had to talk about basketball at some point, didn't they?

I guess that knowing x's and o's in no longer a required skill of a head coach. Phil Jackson always had Tex Winters by his side while winning all of those championships with the Triangle and Kerr brought in Gentry to help him with the details of MDA's offense. Both Jackson and Kerr have been extremely successful. Maybe we got it right. All we have needed is a little love and leadership.

I still see no reason that we would not reach out to Walton and I think in the end the Lakers got the better coach. We will see.

I think you answered a lot of your own questions with the Phil and Kerr comments. As for the bolded part, I am with you on the first part. Our process was stupid. As for the last, right now I expect Walton to have a better career as a coach, but I have no idea if he will be a better coach. That might sound contradictory, but I think whomever was coaching the Lakers after Kobe left would have a top 3 destination team for FAs, and more money than nearly anyone to spend on them. So that person is certainly at an advantage, regardless of their coaching chops.

Certainly the franchise is probably the most important factor in attracting free agents and it certainly appears that we are at the bottom of the list. Most of the blame was and should be put on Robert Sarver. I believe though that the head coach has some skin in the game as well. The great coaches have always seemed to end up with the best talent while attracting those additional role players to make their teams great. I believe that is one of the strengths we think we are getting with the Watson hire. Watson is supposed to be well respected around the league. I think Walton is well respected as well. Certainly the Lakers will have the edge in free agency but I think we should be able to attract someone that can help. I will be disappointed if we don't.

I think the bar should be set for Watson at the .500 level. I believe we should be able to accomplish that goal based on a healthy roster and great coaching. Depending on what happens this summer the Lakers could be very good or very bad. I have no idea where to set the bar for them/Walton at this point.

Watson could end up being a better coach than Walton and I hope he does. At this point though I would prefer Walton. Just my opinion and I an probably wrong, so be it.

I think that if we keep our roster as is (which means adding a ho-hum PF when Mirza and Leuer sign somewhere, and finding a D-league backup PG), just adding our draft this year (assuming we don't trade anything away), I think 41 wins is high over-achievement. I am thinking the expectations are around 33-38 games.

If we can do that exact same thing but also find a way to turn Bledsoe and Knight into a run-of-the-mill PG and a solid PF, I think .500 is fair game.

In all due respect if Watson cannot turn our $140 mil back court into consistent productive players why in the hell did we hire him?

You think Knight just needs better coaching? And Bled is playing without knees. Not sure what any coach can do about that.