Around the League: Playoffs

[Superbone]

If Watson can just get our ball hogs and our most talented players (Bledsoe & Knight) to share the ball on a consistent basis, I will impressed and very happy. That in itself will be a huge step forward.

I agree that this will be quite the challenge. Especially with Knight.

[JustWinBaby]

I'd bet Watson is exposed as a fraud before Walton. Walton's IQ is off the charts.

I guess we are the lone rangers in this argument Shell, so be it.

Watson has been part of losing situations for most of his NBA career. Walton has been part of winning situations for most of his career, as a player and as a coach.

When looking at Watson's career, I just do not see what he has done or who he has played for that gives any indication that he is going to be the 2nd coming. It seems that his biggest positive was that the current group of players like him. That appears to be the reason we did not even interview anyone else. Wow.

Hopefully I am wrong because I want some winning basketball from this franchise sooner than later.

[Mori Chu]

The big difference between Walton and Watson is that Walton's brief partial season of head coaching led to a 39-4 record, while Watson's record during a partial season coaching the Suns was putrid. I realize the rosters were totally different and that a huge disparity was to be expected. But the only "data" we have on Walton is incredible winning percentage, and the only data we have on Watson is losing almost all of his games. So that counts for something.

Another factor is that Walton has at least been around and worked closely with several very good coaches in Kerr and Phil Jackson. Phil in particular groomed Luke Walton for years to be a coach and let him go to coaching meetings. So I have more faith that he has learned a few things despite his relative inexperience.

I don't know if either one will be very good at the end of the day. But I give Walton a higher percentage shot at it if I'm a gambling man.

[JCSunsfan]

Do you have any information to back up your statements, JWB. Gentry was originally in charge of the offense and then Kerr while Ron Adams has been in charge of the defense. I contend that Watson will end up being the better coach.

I agree, and I'm not the biggest Watson fan. Walton is the product of arguably the best regular season in NBA history, I believe he'll be exposed as a fraud within the 1st 2 months of next season.

Walton is a smart kid and potentially a good coach. But there is no particular reason to think he will be better than Watson. They are both young rookie coaches.

[JCSunsfan]

I'd bet Watson is exposed as a fraud before Walton. Walton's IQ is off the charts.

Are you actually talking about an IQ number or just an observation?

[Indy]

The big difference between Walton and Watson is that Walton's brief partial season of head coaching led to a 39-4 record, while Watson's record during a partial season coaching the Suns was putrid. I realize the rosters were totally different and that a huge disparity was to be expected. But the only "data" we have on Walton is incredible winning percentage, and the only data we have on Watson is losing almost all of his games. So that counts for something.

I think that is probably the laziest thing I have ever read from you, Mori. I think your time in the Bay Area during this huge bandwagon event.

[Mori Chu]

The big difference between Walton and Watson is that Walton's brief partial season of head coaching led to a 39-4 record, while Watson's record during a partial season coaching the Suns was putrid. I realize the rosters were totally different and that a huge disparity was to be expected. But the only "data" we have on Walton is incredible winning percentage, and the only data we have on Watson is losing almost all of his games. So that counts for something.

I think that is probably the laziest thing I have ever read from you, Mori. I think your time in the Bay Area during this huge bandwagon event.

Shots fired! Why do you think my post is "lazy"? I realize the Warriors are a great team, but Walton walked in there as a rookie coach and guided them to 39-4. That is very impressive, no matter what roster he had. If they had gone, say, 27-16, would you have been surprised? Wouldn't that have been a decent showing for a team without its head coach, guided by a rookie assistant? Is 39-4 not at all impressive to you, even though the roster he had was great?

If a great roster is all you need, and the coach at the helm is not very important, why didn't Kobe and Shaq win titles before Phil Jackson arrived? Ditto for the Jordan Bulls? Ditto for so many other teams?

I know that nobody coaches in a vacuum, and that Walton had lots of help from a talented coaching staff, and from Kerr himself, who still gave input despite not being well enough to coach the games himself. But still! 39-4! Walton coached the team that went 39-4. I am impressed by that.

I watched plenty of Warriors basketball this year, so I don't think my take on Walton is "lazy." I could very well be dead wrong about him. And I didn't say I think he's a great coach. I just said I think he is worth the Lakers giving him a shot, and that in general I have more optimism about him than I have about Earl Watson, who hasn't demonstrated the same kind of success. I know it's apples and oranges; hand Watson that same Warriors roster and he probably wins a heck of a lot of games. I don't know if he goes 39-4, but he obviously gets a bunch of wins if he lucks into that kind of spot. But I can only judge these guys on what I have seen so far.

[Indy]

I didn't say your assessment of him potentially being a good coach is lazy. I said that saying the major difference between Watson and Walton is their rookie coaching record is lazy.

You don't compare two rookie coaches by their record when one literally inherited the best team in basketball and the other arguable one of the bottom 2-3.

I am not saying Watson showed to be a better coach, or Walton did. All I'm saying is neither proved anything yet.

And typing from my phone may have made it sounded like I was firing shots instead of using more words. Sorry if I offended.

[JCSunsfan]

I didn't say your assessment of him potentially being a good coach is lazy. I said that saying the major difference between Watson and Walton is their rookie coaching record is lazy.

You don't compare two rookie coaches by their record when one literally inherited the best team in basketball and the other arguable one of the bottom 2-3.

I am not saying Watson showed to be a better coach, or Walton did. All I'm saying is neither proved anything yet.

And typing from my phone may have made it sounded like I was firing shots instead of using more words. Sorry if I offended.

Well, they are on fairly equal footing now. Both have bad teams.

[Mori Chu]

I didn't say your assessment of him potentially being a good coach is lazy. I said that saying the major difference between Watson and Walton is their rookie coaching record is lazy.

You don't compare two rookie coaches by their record when one literally inherited the best team in basketball and the other arguable one of the bottom 2-3.

I am not saying Watson showed to be a better coach, or Walton did. All I'm saying is neither proved anything yet.

And typing from my phone may have made it sounded like I was firing shots instead of using more words. Sorry if I offended.

That makes more sense. Thanks for clarifying. I agree with you that neither has proved anything, so they both now get a full season with a bad young team to show what they can do.

[Superbone]

Another factor is that Walton has at least been around and worked closely with several very good coaches in Kerr and Phil Jackson. Phil in particular groomed Luke Walton for years to be a coach and let him go to coaching meetings. So I have more faith that he has learned a few things despite his relative inexperience.

I don't know if you're just not aware or what but Watson has also been around very good coaches. There's a guy named John Wooden you might have heard of as well as Hubie Brown, Jerry Sloan, and George Karl.

[JustWinBaby]

Another factor is that Walton has at least been around and worked closely with several very good coaches in Kerr and Phil Jackson. Phil in particular groomed Luke Walton for years to be a coach and let him go to coaching meetings. So I have more faith that he has learned a few things despite his relative inexperience.

I don't know if you're just not aware or what but Watson has also been around very good coaches. There's a guy named John Wooden you might have heard of as well as Hubie Brown, Jerry Sloan, and George Karl.

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. Wooden truly must be considered the best coach of all time. Hubie Brown was one of my favorites, however I really think both Sloan and George Karl are highly over rated. Sloan had one of the best duos of all time in Malone and Stockton yet could not win a ring. Why does he get credit as a great coach and D'Antoni get criticized for having Nash run his team and being a one trick pony. Both have the same number of NBA championships, zero. He is not better than MDA in my book. Very good but not great.

It appears that Watson is weak in the x's and o's department. What did he discuss in those conversations with all of his coaches, after all he was the PG on all of those teams. I would think x's and o's would be part of all those conversations. I would think they would be a strength since he had to lead the implementation of them of the court. I would think he would be eager to implement things that he saw work and have some new ideas to try since he is now the boss. Very strange IMO.

The facts are both Watson and Walton will be starting at basically the same point. Today Watson has the better roster. I expect Walton will have the better roster when the season starts. We will see who has the best success in their first season, it should be interesting. I am hoping Watson develops the guys he has into a great group. I highly doubt he or Sarver is going to attract any key free agents to this team anytime soon.

[Superbone]

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

[TOO]

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

Nailed it.

[ShelC]

So if Frank Vogel gets fired, would you rather have Watson or Vogel?

[Mori Chu]

So if Frank Vogel gets fired, would you rather have Watson or Vogel?

Vogel. He's a very good coach. Hasn't had a ton of success lately but I like him and think he generally gets a lot out of a flawed/imperfect roster.

[Gladiator]

https://twitter.com/InsiderSuns/status/727384615522955264

Interesting

[Hermen]

It feels like Sacramento is interviewing hundreds of candidates.

[SDC]

I'm sure the Lakers pay better than the Suns.

even if the suns tried to overpay, walton would still sign elsewhere.

[SDC]

So if Frank Vogel gets fired, would you rather have Watson or Vogel?

why? watson is the perfect coach for this team.