I don't think those things are that bad for an assistant coach. I can see Pop (as such an ardent supporter of women's and minority equality) and the organization thinking it's more valuable being tied to furthering that cause by helping her get a step up as opposed to being tied to firing her. There isn't much downside to having her there as an assistant when you have such a great system in place for so long. It doesn't really become a problem unless you're talking about having her run the daily basketball strategy of an organization looking to make a big push in the last few productive years of the best player in franchise history. That could be a big problem. However, if she can take over a team which doesn't need a great coach or is possibly ready to compete (Tyrone Lue?) it could turn out well for everyone involved.
Yeah, I don't know how much a sex change operation costs, but I think if you could get it done and dominate the WNBA for a decade or so the odds are pretty good...
Makes sense, thanks for the write up. I would be happy with most any of the options listed above, including Hammon.
it was a poster here who said this stuff and he was repeating what somebody connected to the Spurs said. I have no reason to doubt the poster's credibility. I'm assuming he just reported what he was told but what was said was very harsh, and the timing pretty suspect suspect. So, coupled with the fact you'd have to believe the Spurs are afraid to fire a really bad coach and have kept the rot in their team for 7 years because of that fear, I just found it hard to believe
I'm lazy.... horrible work ethic... I'm sure the players would definitely tune me out and I think with time I could definitely be the laughing stock of the Spurs organization.
Agreed, I dont get the sense that pop is the kind of guy that is worried about what others think of him or his decisions.
To be fair, I believe it was stated that she “had become lazy”. Insinuating that she was not always that way. Maybe because she feels she is due for a promotion. Who knows. I do find myself highly skeptical of the critique though. I see no reason why his source would lie; but I also see no reason why the Spurs would put up with that behavior.
The sources @calvin natt has might have just been bitter about all of the buzz about Hammon being the best candidate out there right after they had an extremely disappointing season and they felt she was part of the problem instead of the solution. So they may have been fixated on anything negative they had on their minds about her. The critique doesn't have to be correct to exist.
That kinda trash coming from some cowardly unknown source is B.S. If she wasn't made of the right stuff, Pop would have fired her. Sounds like some bitter turd who is unhappy in life.
Question - do you want people to share information if they get it from someone in the know? Or would you prefer they not share? If you choose to not believe them, that's fine, but I personally want people who have sources to share with us that information.
Then the source needs to put his name on it. Talk is cheap, especially in this day and age with social media.
Why would a source do that? He's not talking to a reporter. It's a random dude talking to someone he personally knows. Why would he put his career at risk while sharing something with a friend?
Really? The accusation is from almost 24 years ago and he was never charged. That doesn't mean he didn't do something terrible, but not hiring him for an allegation from so long ago seems remarkably unfair.
