Rick Sund close to a deal. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Seattle SuperSonics and general manager Rick Sund are close to agreement on a new contract, and an announcement could come as early as today. After nearly a month of negotiations, Sund is close to accepting a three-year offer for around $3 million, which means he will make about the same salary he is making in his current contract. ?I?m very optimistic something will get done in the next day or so,? Sund said. Sund would be the first to sign of the Sonics? trio of key people who are without contracts beyond the 2004-05 season. At this point, coach Nate McMillan and All-Star guard Ray Allen have not been able to reach accord with the team. </div> <a href="http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/sonics/story/4962925p-4537167c.html" target="_blank"> Full Story</a> courtesy of The Tacome News Tribune McMillan as Brown's Successor? <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> Piston fans, known (and feared) for their zeal, are already writing him off. While "American Idol" Carrie Underwood sang the national anthem before Game 4, they cheered when Ben Wallace and Chauncey Billups were shown on the scoreboard TV screens. When Brown went up, there was a subdued moan. Nate McMillan, who has yet to re-sign with Seattle, and former Minnesota coach Flip Saunders are reportedly on hold, waiting for Brown to leave.</div> <a href="http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/la-sp-brown21jun21,1,3941672.story?coll=la-headlines-sports&ctrack=1&cset=true" target="_blank"> </a>Full Story courtesy of The Los Angeles Times
I'm very glad that we've locked up Rick Sund. Considering that his value is at an all time high, I'm shocked that he'd accept a contract extension at the same value of his previous contract. That shows the loyalty that he has for this organization, especially considering how hard his job is going to be after July 1st. One thing no one has speculated on is if McMillan were to take the Pistons job (in the event that Brown leaves) who would be a viable replacement for Nate? My first choice has been the same for all coaching vacancies since 1998. How much money would it take to bring Chuck Daly out of retirement? A more feasible choice would be Greg Anthony, considering that he spent a good portion of his career in Seattle and has a stellar reputation in the television booth. I don't particularly like when life long assistants get past over for the "sexy" name, but in the case of Seattle after last season we would need to bring in a coach w/ a buzz to him in order to compensate for the soldiers that we've lost.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Casual:</div><div class="quote_post">New coach = Flip 2.0</div> If Nate did go to Detroit, Mr Saunders would be my first choice to replace him. Very, very good coach, and IMO just a victim of a lot of individual problems with his players.
I'd be happy to see Flip Saunders as our coach if Nate were to leave. How about Lenny Wilkens? He's back in town and provided some nice insight on FSN during the playoffs. He's not so good with knuckleheads but I think with a strong veteran and a crew that seemingly 'gets it' he could do OK. Well to be honest I don't know if he can coach anymore. I just happen to like the guy
^ Why?..Yeah he does look very old tho. Man we need to hurry and sign Nate..Hes a big piece of our team being so sucessful this year.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting legendisdope:</div><div class="quote_post">^ Why?</div> Because he sucks. I'm hoping Nate goes somewhere else so we can snatch up Flip or Terry.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Casual:</div><div class="quote_post">Because he sucks. I'm hoping Nate goes somewhere else so we can snatch up Flip or Terry.</div> You gotta be kidding me. Your hoping Nate is leaving so we can get Terry Porter. What the hell has Terry Porter done as a coach in this league. Thats just ridiculous
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Roland Hood:</div><div class="quote_post">Terry Porter seemed like a good, young coach. The Bucks had a lot of injuries last year and absolutely no frontline to speak of. Now granted I know nothing of what went on over there last year, but it seems like another BS move by Senator Kohl (sp?) Porter made them respectable his first year from the team that George Karl left in a shambles - I heard the biggest change was getting accountability on defense, instead of all that trapping and switching he had them pull up their panties and play their man straight up.</div> From the topic about him. I don't see what's so ridiculous about it. I've said before I don't consider Nate to be a great coach. If we don't get Ray back, I'd have serious doubts about Nate leading the team by himself.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Casual:</div><div class="quote_post">From the topic about him. I don't see what's so ridiculous about it. I've said before I don't consider Nate to be a great coach. If we don't get Ray back, I'd have serious doubts about Nate leading the team by himself.</div> Its ridiculous because you WANT Nate Mcmillian not to be back so we can get a coach like Terry Porter that has accomplished nothing. Nate Mcmillian on the other hand took a team that most experts had picked to finish in the bottom of the western confernce and lead them into the 2nd round of the playoffs where they gave what would become the national champions a run for their money without their 2nd and 3rd leading scorer for most of the series.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Coolguy777:</div><div class="quote_post">Its ridiculous because you WANT Nate Mcmillian not to be back so we can get a coach like Terry Porter that has accomplished nothing. Nate Mcmillian on the other hand took a team that most experts had picked to finish in the bottom of the western confernce and lead them into the 2nd round of the playoffs where they gave what would become the national champions a run for their money without their 2nd and 3rd leading scorer for most of the series.</div> I'm not using their accomplishments of to judge them, especially since both have them haven't been coaching long enough to do so. I believe that Nate had very little to do with the individual accomplishments of the players on the Sonics this year. What he did do was create an environment in which the players could work together and maximize their efforts. Even though he did this, it was obvious that the team came together much on their own, as evidenced by their gathering at halfcourt after each game. I'm not saying Nate McMillan is a bad coach. I'm saying I don't think his abillities as a coach are suited for a young team, which is what the Supersonics will likely be after this offseason. He'd be a good fit for somebody like the Pistons, where he doesn't have to worry about trying to developing or motivating a team and instead can just tell them what to do. Terry Porter, on the other hand, has shown the ability to get young players to work hard and improve their games. Saying that he is a bad coach because he hasn't had a winning record with depleted rosters in only two seasons is ludicrous. During those two seasons, it has been noted how much harder the Bucks play and how much improvement the young team has had. Now, considering that the Sonics will probably not have any locker room leaders except Ray Allen coming back, and that Nate McMillan is not very good at developing individual players, I believe that the team is better off with a coach that can give them discipline and leadership by himself. Nate is not an authority figure. He couldn't even reel in Jerome James. And I think if he's given a team of all young, inexperienced players, he's going to have a lot of trouble molding them into a team unless he has veteran players on the roster to help pick up the slack like Ray Allen and Antonio Daniels did this season. Notice how both those players were the only ones to play consistently well during the playoffs (props to Nick Co. as well). Whose job was it to get the rest of the team prepared for the postseason? You can't blame an entire team's worth of struggles on inexperience. Also refer to the end of the season, when some key players went down on injuries and the Sonics collapsed. Nobody should panic because we lost those games, but notice the way we lost. There was very little effort and coordination between teammates. It raises serious questions about Nate McMillan's ability to mentally prepare a team to become a winner. And the Sonics do need to become winners. We are not contenders yet. What I've just said may make you think I hate management for resigning Nate. Much to the contrary, Nate earned a new contract with the season he just had, and not trying to resign him would be foolish on their part. It's just my opinion that the direction of the team is not one that Nate is qualified to lead us in.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Casual:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not using their accomplishments of to judge them, especially since both have them haven't been coaching long enough to do so.</div> All we have to judge is their accomplishments! <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I believe that Nate had very little to do with the individual accomplishments of the players on the Sonics this year.</div> I think from r position its silly to even act like we know that 1 way or the other. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Terry Porter, on the other hand, has shown the ability to get young players to work hard and improve their games. Saying that he is a bad coach because he hasn't had a winning record with depleted rosters in only two seasons is ludicrous. During those two seasons, it has been noted how much harder the Bucks play and how much improvement the young team has had.</div> For starters I didnt say Terry Porter was a bad coach. However, Nate Mcmillian has clearly proven more as a coach. And suggesting that porter is better at developing younger players is silly. Do you see are roster? they are filled with young players that have developed a lot. I guess that is what we have decided Nate has nothing to do with though?
Another horribly written article from the worst writer in Seattle http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/soni...601_kell26.html I think Steve Kelly wakes up some days and says to himself 'I am going to write a hard-hitting, thought-provoking article today.'
I normally really enjoy Steve's articles, but he is better at writing a feature article, usually a feel good story (like his piece on Leon Smith before last season*). That one came across as a bit tacky and sucky, not his best work at all. *I hate the fact that it is 'last' season, because it just tells me it has to be put in the past, which I don't want it to.
You call it 'feel good' I call it 'pandering' I much prefer Art Thiel of the PI for my daily dose of sports insight. Different strokes, I guess.
