Court of Public Opinion Would Fire Montgomery

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">"Maybe it's new for Mike because he comes from college," Adelman said. "He didn't have as much (dealings with) everybody having an opinion. You know what you're trying to do with your team. You know the warts your team has. Nobody else does. The simplistic view point of the people who are so-called experts is probably not true."</div>

Exactly. That's why this whole Foyle over Dampier, Biedrins over Foyle, Ike over Murphy, Pietrus over Dunleavy, Ellis over Fisher comments are really based off our emotions. It's the emotion that we're tired of what we're seeing, so let's hope the other guy can do it better because we've "seen" them in good minutes. Then when they get starting minutes or increased minutes or such, they don't perform or they can't stay on the floor. I get excited by Pietrus or Ellis as the next guy, but damn there is a reason why they don't get those minutes. I feel as fans we have to be open minded to what the coaching staff is trying to do in their development of young players and for the current team. It's about collaborative team play rather than individualistic style of play and getting guys to play without setting them up to fail. How many people feel sorry for a guy like Jrich who's got all this heart, talent, but a lackluster team surrounding him? Baron's the best player, but damn what good is it if he's injured all the time? sigh...

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Montgomery has been handed a flawed lineup. He is working with the fifth youngest team in the NBA. He has had to deal with a couple of key players having down seasons. All of which, let the outside world tell it, falls on Montgomery's shoulders.

"He's learned that in our league," Adelman said. "It's a players league. No one can deny that with the money the players are making. You've got to find a way to get them to play together."</div>

Exactly on the flawed design part. Especially by Mullin getting the guys with long term deals to play together that don't give us things that this club has struggled with for years. Things have been missing such as dribble penetration, inside scoring, running plays, rebounding, shooting, etc. Unless somebody can take our crap they are here to stay and ignore plays. With this lineup created where Mullin says "there are other ways to score inside", most fans would have no idea how to coach such a poor defensive team without players that can draw double teams, execute as a team, and score consistently. It's like our game play is very different from an 82 game season to the last few weeks of the season when games don't matter. This team can't even shoot at times too. Just look at the free throw situation. If you can't shoot free throws, you ain't a good shooter. Poor mental game and lack of finesse aren't good qualities in a jumpshooting team to get away with playing without a post game (or offensive rebounding). I don't know if it should be the coach's fault he can't control the players, but the way I see it is the players shouldn't need to be controlled. They should be professionals and run the f-ing plays because there's going to be less accomplished by jacking long shots with no chance of going in, overdribbling the ball and standing around in one place.


<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">"They don't have to deal with the day-in, day-out stuff you have to deal with," Adelman said, "whether it's players, attitudes, talent or whatever. I try to go with the philosophy that I don't try to deal with the expectations of the outside world. I deal with the reality of the team itself."</div>

Yeah reality for us fans is definitely hard to take especially because of the 11 season drought. Also expectations were raised after the whole Baron Davis trade got us in a great streak of games where run n' launch threes were getting us wins. But it's all a tease because they were games that don't matter and the supporting cast as well as Baron Davis, did a lot worse this season. There's just no way to win consistently when we have inconsistent players, defenses that can get back on us and score against our own soft defense. I hated how Mullin couldn't or wouldn't make any moves. I mean you can't control the tempo or rely on the three ball to fall down everytime and play the high risk, low percentage type of game. This year we were below average on three point % and even worse at the foul line.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
The reality for Montgomery is that the easiest change is his job, considering the Warriors have most of their key players locked into long-term deals.</div>

It ain't going to solve anything though. Does that remove those long term deals? No. It's why I'm against Montgomery getting fired just yet. It's just jumping to conclusions to assume by underwatering the plant that was the reason the plant wasn't growing. Did anyone check the soil first? The soil being this weak foundationof players to score the ball inside and out and play some defense? We are weak in so many statistical categories as well as the intangibles like the physical play/off the ball movement, it's horrible.

The two most important franchise positions are the center and the point guard. Then its followed by a tie between the SG/SF/PF. The point guard is supposed to be the quickest guy on the court, can do a little bit of everything, is supposed to run a team, play defense, pass and be an extension of the coach. Yet they launch bad shots and iggore plays. These are things either Fisher or Baron has tended to do throughout their careers. Then the center spot is supposed to be the strongest, biggest guy on the court, but he can't be a stiff. We got the undersized Foyle/underweight Biedrins who don't own the paint because they either get outmuscled or outquicked.

Why is it that our point guards or shooting guards can't shoot, interior pass or beat people with quickness? Why can't we pound the ball into our centers or power forwards without them dropping passes or getting pushed off their position in the post? Why isn't our small forward the inside/outside scoring threat and mismatch he was made out to be since the draft? These are all positions we have to get better at because Jrich can be masked as a SF playing shooting guard, but the other guys need to do a better job with their positions' roles in any style of offense. Point guards should be able to run the fast break if needed, they should be able to take wide open jumpers, they should be able to beat most defenders off the dribble, run plays, and stay in front of their defensive assignment. Big men should control the paint, defend, have some measure of power/finesse/footwork to score the ball, get position, rebound, pass from the post.

Very flawed Warriors team design these past two years and I wasn't expecting Mullin to turn this thing over night after getting one all-star player who is a high volume, low %'s guy. How many bad moves has Mullin made recently or made no moves? I'd give Mullin more time, but his logic in designing this team and calling it playoff worthy is ridiculous that he has to get lucky now. He needs more from his positions and he's gambled wrong thus far. Let's hope his drafts are what's going to make this franchise do a lot better in terms of toughness, quickness, smarts, results.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">There have been rumors about him having a poor relationship with point guard Baron Davis. There have been reports about the team losing respect for him, and telling him as much in team meetings. There have been fans calling for his job via online polls, message boards and timely shouts during home games.</div>

Was my old Fire Monty sig seen?

 

Mullin could not have been SERIOUS about keeping Monty, could he?

If Monty is canned, then I rather have an experienced NBA coach, but it could be Smart or Elie. Still, putting twelve years of no playoffs would be a big albatross to put around Smart or Elie to start their head coaching career.

 

Whether or not it's Monty's fault for the teams woes, the fact is nobody on the team listens to him or respects him. In other words, it's the same as him being a crap coach cause he isn't making a difference. So the Warriors are better off getting a different coach in which the players will listen to and respect. Doesn't matter how smart Monty is, if no one is listening to him whats the point?

 

Fire Monty's a$$ -- why not. It's one contract we can shed without facing salary cap hell. If it worked, I'd fire Fisher's candy a$$ in a heart beat. Foyle too. Poof!

My trigger finger's itchy, baby. I gotta have more cowbell. I'd love to fire the albatross of Foyle/Fish. But Monty will have to do. He may be a nice guy. Heck, he could be a terrific NBA coach. But I need to turn my aggresion on someone. I'd fire Monty and re-hire him... just so I could fire his college candy-a$$ again! Poof!

 

Awesome post Custodian. I've sort of fallen off the face of the earth, but I still watch the games when I can and check this board occasionally. It's great to see you make posts like that, makes me feel good to know someone else shares my perspective and is able to articulate it.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AlleyOop:</div><div class="quote_post">Fire Monty's a$$ -- why not. It's one contract we can shed without facing salary cap hell. If it worked, I'd fire Fisher's candy a$$ in a heart beat. Foyle too. Poof!

My trigger finger's itchy, baby. I gotta have more cowbell. I'd love to fire the albatross of Foyle/Fish. But Monty will have to do. He may be a nice guy. Heck, he could be a terrific NBA coach. But I need to turn my aggresion on someone. I'd fire Monty and re-hire him... just so I could fire his college candy-a$$ again! Poof!</div>
AlleyOop, you pretty much sum up the perspective of the majority of Warrior fans for the past eight years or so.

To answer your "why not" question: because the team would be going through the exact same motions that they've gone through with Musselman, Winters, St. Jean, Cowen, Carlisimo, and Adelman. It takes more than two years for a coach to turn a program around. Let me repeat that. IT TAKES MORE THAN TWO YEARS FOR A COACH TO TURN A PROGRAM AROUND. One more time for emphasis. IT TAKES MORE THAN TWO YEARS FOR A COACH TO TURN A PROGRAM AROUND. And just in case you weren't paying attention. IT TAKES...well, you get the idea...

This roster has been turned over and turned over, coaches have come and gone and come and gone. At some point the team needs to say, "No more, we're going to go with the guys we've got." I made this same point a few years ago when it came to resigning Jamison. Even if you aren't sure if the guy is the right fit, you need to make a commitment. Look at Jamison now. How many people wish Jamison was the Warriors' starting sf right now instead of Dunleavy? How many times do you have to fire a coach before you realize that the same philosophy applies to coaches?

Dallas stuck with Nelson when they were just as bad as the Warriors in '98 and '99. Same story with Minnesota and Flip Saunders. Same story with Sacramento and Adelman. Take a look at teams over the last five or ten years that have gone from very bad to very good. I'll guarantee you that the vast majority of the time, the teams had the same coach when they got good that they had when they were bad.

In the meantime, AlleyOop, may I suggest some ways to deal with your aggression (this is taken from the Simpsons episode where a police officer suggests to Marge and others constructive ways to deal with their road rage):
1) Pick a fight with someone weaker then you
2) Fire a weapon at your television screen
3) write a threatening letter to a celebrity.

 

This is the first time I am going to stand up for keeping Monty. Granted we are disappointed in him but I think it is too early to give up. We gave up on Muss when he had 2 years left on his contract. I dont think we should do the same to Monty. I think that if JUST Dunleavy had started off hot like he ended the season, that alone could have translated to more wins, which would have translated to better team chemistry, which would have kept our momentum going longer. The other key issues have been FTs, rebounding and inside game on both ends of the court. I think this team JUST needs a healthy Baron Davis and a low post player that can do it all and we will be just fine. Also a confident Dunleavy who hits his shots could help...

 

First off, the thing about Mike Montgomery compared to previous coaches is that, this team has players that are legit NBA players. Previous years the team was filled with old players who were only starters on a bad team, hence, the bad records.

Second, people are dissapointed with Mike Montgomery because the team has performed WORSE. Nobody is saying that Mike Montgomery should leave because they are dissapointed that things haven't turned around completely. People are upset because it seems as if the team is degressing rather than progressing and improving. The same flaws I see developing in Jason's, Derek's, and Baron's games are the ones I see showing up in Monta Ellis' game. The same flaws of no inside scoring is not improving for anyone on a consistant basis, even with both Diogu and Biedrins shooting incredible FG%.

Finally I want to add something that caught my attention while watching The Best Damn Sports Show Period. The episode had George Karl as a guest. What George Karl said was accurate(it is also something Bobby Knight believes in too) that the bad teams worry too much about dribbling and not enough on passing. The good teams focus on moving by the pass not the dribble. It is painful watching the Warriors just dribble around the perimeter 50 times going nowhere and then make a pass or then a shot. I want to be like Bobby Knight and take those players to an island with a basketball so they can dribble the ball all they want there, then if they want to play basketball then come back and join the team.

The other thing mentioned on this episode of The Best Damn Sports Show Period, was how Ray Allen complimented George Karl on treating everyone on the team equally. George Karl said he doesn't have any favorites on his team and has the same expectations for everyone.

I seriously wish that Mike Montgomery had both of those characteristics in his coaching. Watching the games it is obvious that he doesn't. There are many reasons why players and fans wouldn't and may not like Mike Montgomery. Many times after losses he states how he can't find the answer and doesn't have any solutions. A team, especially a young team, needs to have leadership that actually has solutions from the head coach. If not, then the team goes into confusion and loses faith in their games, their teammates, their coach, the strategies, and everything else. Other problems with Mike Montgomery are his rotations, which is a big lengthy topic in itself, and how there are so many players, worse being starters, who come out and state how they don't really know what they are supposed to be doing in the systems and even says "what offense?" when asked about the team's game-plan.

It is obvious to me that unless Mike Montgomery improves a lot and gets great mentoring and a lot more, then he's not going to be the answer for this team.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">Finally I want to add something that caught my attention while watching The Best Damn Sports Show Period. The episode had George Karl as a guest. What George Karl said was accurate(it is also something Bobby Knight believes in too) that the bad teams worry too much about dribbling and not enough on passing. The good teams focus on moving by the pass not the dribble. It is painful watching the Warriors just dribble around the perimeter 50 times going nowhere and then make a pass or then a shot. I want to be like Bobby Knight and take those players to an island with a basketball so they can dribble the ball all they want there, then if they want to play basketball then come back and join the team. </div>
I understand that it may seem like the Warriors don't pass enough, but I would like to point out that they are 13th in the league in assists, compared to 15th in the league in made field goals. But I don't think assists are what you're talking about. I think what you're talking about is wanting to see more team chemistry and command of the offense. Well, if you want to see a team do those things, DON'T FIRE THE COACH. He needs time to put an offense in, especially with a team as young as the Warriors.

Montgomery needs Montgomery-type players to run a Montgomery-type offense. What he's got are players from as far back as the Carlisimo era. That's THREE GM'S and SIX coaches worth of players. Each guy has his own unique style that calls for it's own unique blend of players. It takes more than two years for the coach to get his players playing the way he wants and for the GM to get him the TYPE of players that he wants.

Speaking of players...

As long as Diogu and Ellis are in the game you're going to see less organized ball movement and less of Montgomery's playbook. Ellis is fresh out of high school and Diogu spent three years in a system where he readily admitted that his role in the offense was basically to just go post up and wait for the ball. Neither of these guys are capable of running an NBA offense to the degree of perfection it needs to be run. Add to that the fact that Biedrins and Pietrus are getting a lot of minutes as primary reserves, and you just don't have a whole lot of players capable of the level of play you require. But guess what, THAT'S NOT MONTGOMERY'S FAULT. He's just the easiest guy to blame.

You say, "but there's been a regression from last year to this year." I take it that you mean the Warriors have regressed since their 14-4 run to end last year and their 12-6 beginning to this year. Well guess what, what's happened is not regression. I don't think any coach or player on the Warriors would say that they have regressed as a team. What has happened was Baron got injuried and the Warriors have been mired in the "it has to get worse before it gets better" phase of becoming Montgomery-type players.

The team is going to go through it's peaks and valleys during a season. But as long as you keep the team and coach together and avoid a mutiny by the players, things are always going to get better overall.

The problem with Warrior fans is that it's been so long since the team has been to the playoffs, the fans and media will no longer accept losing by one coach for more than two years before demanding a change. But, it's going to take more than two years to turn this thing around.

 

You say it's going to take more than 2 years to turn this team around. But after 2-4 years and nothing changes, then what? I understand your argument about giving the coach some time to get a chance to turn the team around. But what if he just can't coach the NBA game, and we waste 2-4 years figuring this out.

 

Actually, Ike Diogu is a very good passer, and he is a player that you can run and offense with. There is no reason why you can't. He can shoot from the outside, post up, and he can pass it to the cutter when it happens. Also most offenses aren't run through centers unless if it's post it up and score. No, this is not the case for all teams. The Kings are an exception with Brad Miller, but besides that I don't see centers being highly involved in plays and stuff besides screening and such. Maybe if Andris doesn't understand when a play is being called, then that could be a fault of Andris. But I like Andris' FG% so he is doing something right.

Also, what I am most upset about, is not how the reserves run their stuff, but how the starters run the systems. Murphy and Mike Dunleavy, two starters, have both commented how they don't understand the offense that they play or don't agree with it and think it should be better. Add to that with Foyle who is not an offensive threat, and you can tell that this is a poorly run team, especially on offense. Defensively the team is pretty bad personale wise, so I don't know, I won't harpen too much on defense.

Players won't say that they have regressed, but the standings will. The thing the players will say, though, is that they feel as if they underachieved this year.

Also is Baron Davis' injury that big of an excuse? He played 54 games. That's not too bad with Baron.

Also I can agree that it takes time to bring in players for a coach that might fit the coach more exactly. However it doesn't mean that the coach can't get the current players running. I mean it seems like the whole roster should go sometimes because of the way they play(you can read some of CR2's posts about that).

 

A coach should have stabilizing and trust factors into his players
only with that can the team exceed, especially with such a young/inexperienced (relatively speaking) team like golden state that consistently go into late game collapse and inconsistency when it counts (eg. playoff push or crucial road games/must win games etc)

i believe montgomery doesn't get any of those

why does he get support from mullin?
i don't know...i really don't...

with such a high payroll
this team is in a mess
they don't have consistent enough offence to be the phoenix suns
therefore they can't afford to play zero defence

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">You say it's going to take more than 2 years to turn this team around. But after 2-4 years and nothing changes, then what? I understand your argument about giving the coach some time to get a chance to turn the team around. But what if he just can't coach the NBA game, and we waste 2-4 years figuring this out.</div>
If, after four years, Montgomery hasn't turned it around to the point of making the playoffs at least once and having the future looking bright, sure, fire him. The problem is this franchise has wasted TWELVE years by firing it's coach every two years.

Say Montgomery is fired this offseason, and the team hires someone like Paul Silas to take over. Silas teams are completely different from Montgomery teams, his players are completely different players from Montgomery players. It would be two years (according to you more for me) to tell if he's a success or not. If he's not, then you'd fire Silas and you've wasted the two years you weren't willing to spend on Montgomery.

Guess what? This franchise has tried that six times already, so far it hasn't worked once. I'm certainly willing to try something different.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">If, after four years, Montgomery hasn't turned it around to the point of making the playoffs at least once and having the future looking bright, sure, fire him. The problem is this franchise has wasted TWELVE years by firing it's coach every two years.

Say Montgomery is fired this offseason, and the team hires someone like Paul Silas to take over. Silas teams are completely different from Montgomery teams, his players are completely different players from Montgomery players. It would be two years (according to you more for me) to tell if he's a success or not. If he's not, then you'd fire Silas and you've wasted the two years you weren't willing to spend on Montgomery.

Guess what? This franchise has tried that six times already, so far it hasn't worked once. I'm certainly willing to try something different.</div>

I think Mussleman would have been able to turn the club around with these group of players, was he given a chance? No. The same man Mullin who believes the same thing you do fired Mussleman after 1 year. A bit ironic. All just cause he wouldn't play our favorite franchise player Mike Dunleavy

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Awesome post Custodian. I've sort of fallen off the face of the earth, but I still watch the games when I can and check this board occasionally. It's great to see you make posts like that, makes me feel good to know someone else shares my perspective and is able to articulate it.</div>
Thanks, appreciate it Wtwalker. It's always good to hear from you, too.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">
Also I can agree that it takes time to bring in players for a coach that might fit the coach more exactly. However it doesn't mean that the coach can't get the current players running. I mean it seems like the whole roster should go sometimes because of the way they play(you can read some of CR2's posts about that).</div>

Yeah, I kinda hate the style of basketball that is too conservative, but at the same time I'm not even sure what this team's strengths are with this current roster. We can't really run because Baron is injured and Fish isn't that type of player to run a fastbreak... like at all. Plus he just lacks quickness of feet to react to defenses or offenses. Conversely, if we do run with a healthy Baron, teams will just pack in the middle or overplay everyone else and hope Baron will chuck it. There's not too many talents outside of Jrich/Baron that can get'er done, but that's mainly asking for an all perimeter scoring load and poor free throw shooting. There's not much a team can do when there's an answer for our type of offense every single time, especially in the fourth quarter. I think Mullin has to make some decisions regarding how he's going to re-design the interior and exterior style of play and address things like passing, dribble penetration, different kinds of scoring, rebounding, defense, etc because it's not getting done, especially if that hot three point shooting from last season isn't falling and we're missing free throws at rates of over half and our center can't even catch the f-ng ball.

I like almost all the players, but I'm for the greater good. I would like point guards to play like point guards, power forwards to play like power forwards, shooting guards to play like shooting guards, and actually have a decent center and small forward (I'm not saying Foyle and Dunleavy suck, but they play like absolute sht on most nights). In the future, it would be nice to get players who are physically/mentally quick and strong, can create by dribbling, shooting facing-up or backing down in the post and passing the ball inside and out. We didn't even have that on paper, so I guess it was why Mullin went out and got those draft picks he got.

The other thing is we can't count on our depth when its all rookies or guys too raw to take advantage of their physical skills. I'm very cautious, but hopeful of our rookie class and that we don't assume that they're ready to play until they're actually ready to play. Otherwise, if they're thrown out there, how do we know if that's the best way to develop them, especially with the team that's out there? What if they make too many mistakes, develop too many bad habits and they can't go in there and play naturally because they think too much about not making mistakes rather than playing instinctively? So we could change the coach, but I'd rather let him stick around see what he can do with some good players. Maybe he'll help turn the Warriors around like he did at Montana and also what he did at Stanford if he can just acquire the right players that fit and also are not named Fisher/Foyle/Dunleavy and anybody else that is trying to play apart from the team (like Baron was rumored to, but hell I don't trust the media no more).

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">I think Mussleman would have been able to turn the club around with these group of players, was he given a chance? No. The same man Mullin who believes the same thing you do fired Mussleman after 1 year. A bit ironic. All just cause he wouldn't play our favorite franchise player Mike Dunleavy </div>
Nah, I highly doubt Musselman could have won with this group. The problem the franchise has had is they keep thinking the coaching style is going to create the team identity, but it's really a matter of having a team first. What we've got is just a collection of players. Maybe we can develop some identity based on what the players' strengths are utilize those strengths in the inside and outside game, then on defense. But then, what happens when those strengths are inconsistent on a game to game basis or the players just don't add the type of strengths needed. What happens if the mindset for the team game is missing or they don't have the right strengths as a team to counter what the other team is doing to us? Right now our center and power forward spots have to be the worst of what is missing in any offense, which is all-around defense and some interior scoring. Because of that we're limited to what little we can do in terms of shooting and dribbling the ball. Fundamentals wise, the team doesn't run plays or move off the ball to receive passes. So that's another shot in the foot.

Whether its fastbreak offense, half court or whatnot, you better have the decisionmakers, rebounders, the shooters, the transition D, and the difference makers at the line, dribbling and passing the ball. Also, a team that can't stay in front on defense that plays zone won't last long in the defensive rebounding department especially because box-outs become worthless. Since we have all these problems, it's hard to imagine us trying to play either a good running game or a good half court game or any honest defense outside of switching and back and forth between defensive assignments. Like wtwalker was arguing we just need to stop doing this coaching carousel and find players that we can stick with that make sense in the coach's offense. I studied up on motion offense, having played organized basketball before, and I think it would work compared to just chucking long shots, standing around and not knowing what the other guy is going to do. If we stick with the coach long enough to see what he can actually do with a reasonable team (think Larry Brown's situation and how some fans are calling him out for his decisions) I think fans will get off his back and stop playing the blame game we do every year on the coach. I mean Montgomery has turned around programs and it took at least four years for the recruiting class to come in and the seniors to ship out and at least one or two years before the rookies that are raw/physically weak get stronger and properly vetted.

Here's the other thing: I bet most of the Warriors roster would not even start for other teams, that's how bad it is. At least old farts like Clif Robinson, Dale Davis and Nick Van Exel were one-time allstars that made the playoffs before. After that we've got few difference makers on the defensive or offensive ends of the floor. In the NBA, it's more physical, guys are quicker to get out on jumpshooters, and we don't have the kind of physical talent or teamwork type weapons to compete with. It's really the worst of both worlds to have a team that can't do anything particularly well to begin with, especially when the Warriors players keep shooting themselves in the foot by missing free throws, wasting posessions, not boxing out when the other team misses their free throws and they get the ball back.

Then we may have smartasses. Guys like Murphy might have said, "what system?" in the case of Montgomery's effect on the team. But heck, it's either the media taking something out of context like they usually do and us misinterpreting it, or Murphy doesn't know he's talking about because he himself has trouble understanding playsets that involve more than one passing option (it's why he doesn't pass, I think, it's not a strong game of his to make decisions with the ball). Then Baron might be another guy who doesn't pass when he really needs to and ignores plays. He's probably just as frustrated/annoyed as Montgomery is for the lack of a team with inside play, guys not being able to catch, and guys not being able to hit open jump shots. Then Fisher will never change because the guy ain't Chauncey Billups. I hope the management can identify some changes that need to be made with Montgomery's inherited roster. Changes that need to be made so there's reliable options on the floor from all areas, at least a secondary ballhandler/passer and some interior presence on the offensive glass and underneath the basket. These are all things teams should have and if they don't, they'll have a tougher time in winning unless they've found a strong niche with lots of talent. Generally speaking, if we got a backcourt that does their job distributing the ball, a physical front line that gets us some decent inside scoring, some decent defense from the starting five, plus a solid, experienced bench and role players, we could turn this around. We've just got a crappy current roster right now. Role player starters with long deals, no way to create shots, no off the ball teamwork, a rookie bench, no way in hell we can make the playoffs unless we play perfectly each game. We're a low % team and it's because we're perimeter oriented and we allow higher %'s to the other team.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Nah, I highly doubt Musselman could have won with this group.
</div>

Why do you say this about Mussleman and are such a avid supporter about keeping Monty and giving him a chance to turn the club around? Shouldn't Mussleman have gotten a chance?

 

i agree with Anime
not only because of his HOT sig of Hyori
but also the fact that i always thought musselman can make this team competitive

he brings that intensity to the game that this team lacks