Even though Musselman showed flashes of being a good coach he had to have been fired. Before the huge winning streak they had at the end of the season, the team had a huge losing streak. No one was playing to their potential and the team chemistry was not there until one man stepped up. That man was Cliff Robinson. The last game of the season all of the younger guys credited Robinson to sticking through the end of the season no matter what the outcome was. This followed the Pietrus fiasco. It's Musselman's job to rally the players to have a mindset to win, not Robinson. If it wasn't for Robinson we would have the 5th pick in the draft and we would be feeling a lot worse. I have waaaaay more faith in Montgomery to be successful than Musselman. There was a Florida road trip in the earlier part of the season where both Orlando and Miami creamed us. During the Miami game Rafer Alston torched the warriors. There was no adjustment made throughout the rest of the game. After the way we lost those two games I knew there was no shot at the playoffs and I also knew that Musselman wouldn't last too much longer. There is no way there could be a less prepared coach for those games than Musselman. Not only that but Montgomery knows how to win and is an X's and O's guy.
One thing I learned in 7+ years of surfing BBall forum, to fans, every single coach in NBA are an idiot when it comes to a substitution. Larry Brown was ripped by both 76ers fans and Detroit fans, Sanders was ripped by Wolves fans, Jackson was ripped by Lakers fans... It's because, as you mentioned, fans have 20/20 hindsight vision to evaluate coach's substituion. As I said before, Muss' substitution pattern is not perfect in any stretch of imagination. However, what's the good substitution is for? To win the game. So, I always look at the bottom line when I evaluate coaches; how many wins and how much talents were given, while trying to refrain myself from breaking individual game down, since coaches are also human and they do make number of mistakes during the season. And, last two years, Muss won more games than any of fans expected, despite number of key injuries. And, I disagree that our success in second half is mainly due to our veterans. As we observed last year's NJ, when players gave up on Scott, they went freefall, despite having many veteran players. However, when they got the new coach, they went something like 11 game winning streak. No matter how many good veterans you have, you still need a good coach to make things work, especially when most veterans just joined Warriors in this season, instead of staying and knowing each other for years by staying with Warriors. There is a no question that some sort of rumbling was going on between Muss and players, and during those stretch, we played like a crap. However, for some strange reason, we rebounded nicely in second half and played with energy. It's just impossible to imagine that Warriors players gave 120%, despite they just could not stand Muss. That doesn't happen in professional sports, unless you are young player with contract year, and most of cases, the team usually fall flat or self-destruct, as we saw number of times. If they still hated each other, Warriors players could easily have given up the season when we suffered like 9 straight losses and force Muss to be fired. However, exactly opposite happened after the losing streak. Most likely, they made up their difference in the mid season, and you really didn't hear much complain but positive comment at the end of the season. All those are speculation and there is no way for any of us to know what really happened last season. Bottom line for me is that we overachieved despite lack of talents and number of key injuries, and we ressurected ourselves from the losing streak that essentially ended any chance of PO. And, since Muss was the headcoach of the team, he gets my credit for two overachiving seasons and ressurecting players when the all hope was seemlingly gone. As for Montgomery, I have no opinion on him yet. Generally NBA players do not like too much X's and O's as we saw from PJ, and I can't name one big name college coach to be succeed in NBA yet. And, the word 'teach' and 'NBA players' generally do not mix well. But, unlike most of college coaches, Montgomery has a knack for winning games no matter what kind of talents were given (I mean, who had succeful NBA career from Stanford?). If he becomes flexible, he may very well be a succeful NBA coach. Until I see any positive/negative sign, I won't have any opinion on him...
So Musselman gets fired for one losing streak? Is this what people are saying? He gets fired for a losing streak, even though he was given a terrible roster game in and game out. Not only was it terrible but it was a different roster game in and game out. Wow, I'm shocked. For a coach that has given so much to this team, this is how we treat Musselman. I mean tell me which team the Warriors consistantly had more talent/better roster than compared to the rest of the West. Musselman might not have used the most conventional or usual sub-rotation. And you can second guess Musselman easily(because of this), but you can second guess every single coach that has ever tried coaching basketball. Musselman isn't different. The thing about Musselman though was that his record showed how good his rotations were. Maybe they weren't the best, again that's the process when you sign a young coach. But his records have shown that he had done a good job, unpopular rotation or popular rotation, it doesn't matter. And the thing was; he would only get better. Also the Pietrus fiasco was more against his teammates and the organization. I think it was less with Musselman. Pietrus called out the players to be more professional and to actually give a damn. I don't think he said anything really bad about Musselman. Maybe he wanted more playing time, but that is a good thing. And Clifford Robinson was big for the Warriors I agree, so was Avery Johnson. They did help hold up the fort. But you can't blame Musselman for not making things go perfectly. He's a young coach, and he was given a damn hard hand to work with. You give any coach, young and old, what he had to go through, and they would have a tough time as well. Luckly the Warriors had Clifford Robinson and Avery Johnson, and I bet Musselman learned a lot from those guys and Musselman would only learn from this situation and from those vets to get better. And I believe Musselman did get better as the season went on. But now we are holding our hopes that Montgomery, a coach with no pro experience or dealing with professional players and attitudes is expected to make this better? I mean that is why we fired Musselman and hired this guy, right? I don't understand that logic. At the end of the season Speedy Claxton compared the Warriors locker room and chemistry to the Spurs, the Spurs team that won the championship. Hell even Greg Popovic former coach of the year doesn't get along with his players that greatly all the time. How many times have you seen Parker and Ginoboli getting chewed out by him? He does it all the time. So, I don't know, I think Musselman should had gotten more respect from Mullin. Also if you want to go by what the players said, I believe all of them or at least most of them wanted the team to stay together for next season. And I think if they were healthy for next season and stayed together they could had done damage. Now Mullin has done some uneccessary moves in my mind in firing Musselman and signing Foyle to that huge contract, and now it doesn't seem like Dampier will be back. So I guess I don't really know what to think of this team or the direction of this team. I think it's very questionable. And I guess that is my analysis of this team and it's decisions lately.
Those are some good points, Kwan, but I like how upsidedown mentioned how Cliff Robinson played an integral part of getting the players to play hard despite knowing they wouldn't make the playoffs. He's also, in my opinion, the one that was the face of professionalism for the Warriors organization. He stressed playing hard for the fans because they made it possible for them to live the life they have. He said that we (basketball players) owe a lot to the fans and that the game of basketball has been good to them so the least they can do is play hard and play for pride and be professional. (I don't know the quote word for word but that's the jist of it). I couldn't prove it you, but I bet him talking to his teammates at team meetings, that would just inspire you and turn your whole attitude around, the why pout, let's prove the haters wrong kind of attitude. I think that was the turning point. Plus, I think that was when Dunleavy started getting more assertive, and used to his role as a point guard. The guy got 20 rebounds and 20 points or some insane stats and he was wanting the ball and taking it inside more. Don't get me wrong I'm not a big fan of Dunleavy nor a supporter of him playing point guard full time so he can average 20/20 games all the time and not dish the ball.
There is no question that Cliff's influence was big, but that also doesn't mean that Cliff's influence alone lead the team to play 120%, while Muss' influence was minimal or negative. Not only one veteran can only effect so much, if Warriors was indeed ready to implode, Cliff's influence was far from enough to keep the team together to begin with. When players knew that there was a problem between soon-to-be-GM Mullin and Muss, they could even make Muss to be fired during the season by not trying hard after 9 game losing streak (which happens one too many times in NBA). Cliff's pet talk wouldn't be enough for other players to refuse that temptation, if Muss and players didn't make up their differences. Last year's AWOL Richardson gave a positive comment to Muss, and even Dampier gave a credit to Muss at the end of the season. Sure, those could have been a lip service, but if they really hated Muss and wanted to show professionalism, they could have easily left no comment to Muss...
That's very true as well, but do you guys think that Musselman would even be replaced if Montgomery declined to take the job? I mean Mario Elie as head coach this year over Musselman? I don't think so. I mean Montgomery kind of came as a surprise to us all. It blew me away. But everyone knew Mullin found somebody when they weren't going to extend Musselman's contract for the next couple of seasons and Musselman was talking to other coaches about a possible job (who knew it was to be assistant coaches to Mike Montgomery).
I think Muss was gone no matter what. Not only the relationship between Muss and Mullin was bad, Mullin probably wanted to carve his own dynasty, instead of relying on Saint's man. Montgomary was indeed a surprise pick. It was a bold move, because how college coaches pan out in NBA. I don't know Mullin was thinking about Elie as a headcoach, but Montgomary certainly draw more attention than Elie, so I think it's nice move at this point. I can only pray that Montgomary will pan out in here...
Word. Obviously guys like Tarkanian and Pitino inherited mediocre teams and those coaches were used to having star players in college... I don't know if that's the whole story because I don't really know those coaches, their players or what their coaching staff was like. Now I'm hoping because Montgomery has shown in college he can do more with less and has some good assistant coaches at hand, he can make the Warriors playoff bound finally and provide a system that this team is known for. I'm just happy we have a system finally. Now it's just up to us to get that point guard that can run that system. I'm hoping it can be someone like Kidd if we want to take on that humongous contract and if the Nets want what we have.
There are two reasons Musselman was fired: he was unco-operative with Mullin and he lost the team. It was bad. It's bad that the vets took control. It doesn't make you look good as a coach. I know all coaches make mistakes but he made a lot of them. Not only that but this is what pisses me off the most...He benches the young guys, says he will only play the seasoned veterans and when he does play these veterans they get all the playing time, hurting the growth of our young players. Not only that but these vets have short contracts and leave because there is a payday waiting for them. That leaves us our young underdeveloped players. Makes no sense. That hurts the warriors in the long haul. I can understand why he wants to win as many games as possible but don't stunt the growth of our team and say "I did my best." Shut up Musselman. I mean all this over a coach who gave us 37 & 38 wins. I know the year before we had 21 wins but we had a lot of talent over the past two years. With our roster, we could have gotten the 8th spot. Claxton is awesome, Jrich was awesome, Dunleavy looked awesome at times but Musselman really made life hell for him, Pietrus should have played more, Dampier had a good year, Cliff played out of his mind. Not only that but look at the 2002-03 season. Looking back at that roster we should have made the playoffs for sure. Boykins is a big time player in Denver, Arenas was a star, Richardson is ballin this year, Jamison is a very good SF, Dampier is supposedly the 3rd best center in the league and we had Dunleavy comin off the bench with Troy Murphy averaging a double double. That lineup is better than Utah, Portland, Seattle, Clippers and Houston from last year. Lineups can't get you into the playoffs as we have seen so the problem was maybe coaching?
Coaches take the blame for more than they are really responsible for. They are vital in the process because they are the "leaders" of their teams, but they also can excel and benefit greatly from the other personnel - the players on the team. They deserve a lot of the credit and also a lot of the blame, but unfortunately, coaches are the focal point of the team and take the blame head-first. Musselman overachieved in the 2002-2003 season. Players were young, there's no way you can compare them in hindsight. Arenas was sitting on the bench ala Pietrus his first season, Jamison never shared the ball, Damp was still recovering from his injuries, Dunleavy was a rookie. Lineups on paper often look a lot better than the results you get on court. Incredible coaches, like Jerry Sloan, can make a team more than the sum of its parts and continue to do so for many seasons. Other good coaches, like Doc Rivers, can do it for a while but people can see through it quickly. Musselman never had the players that fit "his" system - he had to adapt to get the players that he was given. He did a great job while he was here. It just didn't work out. I mean, even with the team we have now, it's difficult to say what kind of style of ball we play, or what kind of offense we run, or what kind of defense we'll play on any given night. Montgomery will have a bit more time to integrate his style into the Warriors and maybe it'll work, maybe not. In the end, I think that it's the players and personnel that will bring us wins or losses.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">There are two reasons Musselman was fired: he was unco-operative with Mullin and he lost the team. It was bad. It's bad that the vets took control. It doesn't make you look good as a coach. I know all coaches make mistakes but he made a lot of them. Not only that but this is what pisses me off the most...He benches the young guys, says he will only play the seasoned veterans and when he does play these veterans they get all the playing time, hurting the growth of our young players. Not only that but these vets have short contracts and leave because there is a payday waiting for them. That leaves us our young underdeveloped players. Makes no sense. That hurts the warriors in the long haul. I can understand why he wants to win as many games as possible but don't stunt the growth of our team and say "I did my best." Shut up Musselman. I mean all this over a coach who gave us 37 & 38 wins. I know the year before we had 21 wins but we had a lot of talent over the past two years. With our roster, we could have gotten the 8th spot. Claxton is awesome, Jrich was awesome, Dunleavy looked awesome at times but Musselman really made life hell for him, Pietrus should have played more, Dampier had a good year, Cliff played out of his mind. Not only that but look at the 2002-03 season. Looking back at that roster we should have made the playoffs for sure. Boykins is a big time player in Denver, Arenas was a star, Richardson is ballin this year, Jamison is a very good SF, Dampier is supposedly the 3rd best center in the league and we had Dunleavy comin off the bench with Troy Murphy averaging a double double. That lineup is better than Utah, Portland, Seattle, Clippers and Houston from last year. Lineups can't get you into the playoffs as we have seen so the problem was maybe coaching?</div> So, if Muss lost the team and veterans took over, did they say something like "look, we hate Muss. So, let's give our 120% for Warriors, win as much games as possible in this meaningless season and provide a reason to keep Muss"? No. They are veterans, professional and human beings. They are not Warriors loyalist. No matter how many veterans you have, if the coach lose the team, they just cannot give 120% effort every day like how Warriors did 2nd half of the season. We saw number of examples from NJ and Lakers this year, Raiders last season, Nelson, PJ, Cowens and number of places. You just don't flip the switch and win 9 straight games (or something like that), unless head coach has some sort of control over the team. And, don't act like Dunleavy's 31.1 mins or Pietrus's 14.1 mins will halt their improvement in the long run. Dunleavy got plenty of mins to be effective in first 3 quarters, and one too many times, he was ineffective until he played PG role. And, when that happened, he played more mins. And, Nash, who's more refined than Pietrus in his rookie season, played 10 mins and last time I check, he turned out to be a fine NBA player. Don't exaggerate that their relatively lack of mins in rookie season and 2nd year will hinder thier development in the long term. Muss had exactly same roster when he first entered and he set NBA record by winning 17+ games for crying out loud! And, this season, not only we lost Jamison and Arenas, his replacement NVE was nonexistant. And, to make things worse, we were horrendously injured! But, for some strange reason, we won 37 games. If we had that good of roster to make PO, then let me ask this question. Was Saint an excellent GM? Good enough to create a roster, which could have made PO spot in tough tough Western conference, but the bid was foiled by a horrible coach? And, Mullin was ready to trade Robinson for Barry via sign and trade http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,14...2271229,00.html NOTES: Brent Barry is expected to sign a four-year, $22 million deal with San Antonio today, even though several teams -- including the Warriors -- offered more money. A report out of Seattle had Mullin putting up Clifford Robinson in a sign-and-trade, a move that would have allowed the former De La Salle High standout to make close $1 million more per year, but Barry apparently has opted for the best shot at a championship ... If his influence was at the level where he could keep the team from imploding and made other young players to give 120% when they hate the headcoach and there was no chance for PO, why did Mullin try to trade him for Barry? 1. The report is wrong (possible) 2. Mullin didn't believe that those kind of veteran influence, which can hold the team from being apart, is unnecessary (No) 3. We need another SG (No) 4. Mullin is an idiot or try to collect every white players possible (don't think so) 5. While, Robinson demonstrated the meaning of being a professional and showed positive influence, his influence wasn't as magnificiant as some people believed...
6.) He wants more rebounding. Cliff can't rebound and Mullin wants Murph and Biedrens in there at power forward and we desperately need another shooter with veteran experience rather than streaky old Cliff. Oh well I still love Cliff. 7.) Cliff was complaining about soreness in his back or his knees (I don't know!). I can kind see what Zhone and upsidedown are getting at. I agree with both points. But then again I'm wish washy when it comes to Musselman.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kwan1031:</div><div class="quote_post"> And, don't act like Dunleavy's 31.1 mins or Pietrus's 14.1 mins will halt their improvement in the long run. Dunleavy got plenty of mins to be effective in first 3 quarters, and one too many times, he was ineffective until he played PG role. And, when that happened, he played more mins. And, Nash, who's more refined than Pietrus in his rookie season, played 10 mins and last time I check, he turned out to be a fine NBA player. Don't exaggerate that their relatively lack of mins in rookie season and 2nd year will hinder thier development in the long term. Muss had exactly same roster when he first entered and he set NBA record by winning 17+ games for crying out loud! And, this season, not only we lost Jamison and Arenas, his replacement NVE was nonexistant. And, to make things worse, we were horrendously injured! But, for some strange reason, we won 37 games. </div> Dunleavy did get 30 minutes a game but he was hardly in the game the last quarter whenever we were in a close game. How does that effect Dunleavy? Well look what it did to Richardson. Last year he played with no confidence and was benched for Sura A LOT. After that he requested a trade. That was in the paper when he said he changed his mind and wanted an extension this offseason. This year Richardson was vital in close games and is turning into a playmaker. Benching someone in the 4th quarter will hinder your performance and confidence. Do coaches bench Mike Miller, Rip Hamilton, or Brent Barry? No. Do we have someone much better than Dunleavy on the bench? No. You can only learn by doing. Look at freakin Gilbert Arenas. When Claxton was injured, night after night Musselman would pass on Pietrus. We had a seven man rotation and playoff chances were over but we still wouldn't play a rookie. When we did play him, things changed and the defensive intensity was high. If those injuries didn't happen, the minutes per game would have been 3 or even less. Who was better than him? Cheaney was okay but he had a lot of stale games. I don't hate Musselman but he rubbed people the wrong way, he was way too stubborn and did not adjust well to other teams. Face it, GS and Musselman did not work out. He was fired for a reason. He needs to go to a team where the superstars are already there, he's too stubborn to deal with Dunleavy's and Richardson's. BTW, I do think St. Jean did a nice job getting us talent. Richardson, Arenas, Murphy, Jamison, Boykins, Cardinal, Pietrus, Dunleavy, Speedy. I don't think he should be a GM though. Mullin has connections and had a good rapport with a lot of people. Why do you think Biedrins slipped? Since Mullin has been GM, I've heard the warriors come up in more trade discussions this summer then the past two years combined.
Yes! Let's play Mike No Defense Dunelavy in the fourth quarter all the time. What a great idea... The Warriors needed defense in the fourth quarters, since they didn't have an overpowering offense. Thus we saw Cheaney, a very capable scorer and better defender in there a lot in the fourth quarters(over Dunleavy). Also we saw Cardinal in there in big parts of the game because he was energy and hustle, something that a team needs in the fourth quarters at times, especially with Cardinals scoring abilities. And we had Clifford Robinson in there late in games a lot, trying to milk all we could get out of him since as many have said, the Warriors have almost no passers outside of Cliff, Speedy, NVE, and Dunleavy. Also Cliff's good defense was also a plus late in games along with his big moment shots. Thus they could make things happen through a somewhat organized half court offense. That's why you didn't see Dunleavy playing late in games. If you don't like that idea, then you can have that opinion. But Musselman's record showed it worked. So you can't complain too much about it. And maybe it wasn't Musselman who had the attitude problems here. Maybe it was the players who had the attitudes. You don't see Parker or Ginoboli complaining like Dunleavy did, and Parker and Ginoboli probably get chewed out more than Mike did. I've brought this up several times before, and I'll do it again. Mike Dunleavy's irresponsible decisions during the all-star break was a very very bad sign to me, and to the Warriors I think. How can you have everyone saying "We're going to make a 2nd half push." then go behind all of their backs and go play in that pointless rookie/soph game and screw up your leg worse than it already was, which means you miss about two weeks of the season putting your team in a hole early in the second half of the season? You don't do that if you are for your team and winning. That was a BIG mistake by Dunleavy's part. It is worse than Arenas and JRich skipping practice that one time two seasons ago. I am so amazed how people just turned the other way at that incident. Musselman was told to win, and he tried to do that the best he could. There were unfortunate injuries and a bad hand dealt, but in the end Musselman did a hell of a job, period
^ Greg Popovich yells at his players like they were his naughty children, or something, especially at Parker. Just watching him makes me hoarse.
Actually I like Mike Dunleavy Sr. yelling at Chris Kaman and calling him a big dummy. What would it be like if the plan that Mike Dunleavy Sr came here beause we drafted his kid would have actually worked... I bet he'd bench his own kid in the 4th for lack of D.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">Yes! Let's play Mike No Defense Dunelavy in the fourth quarter all the time. What a great idea... </div> After that first line alone, I know you hate Mike "No Defense" Dunleavy. Seriously, if your going to think along the logic to never play him in the 4th we might as well trade him and start Pietrus which could be an option but I would prefer to see how Dunleavy does. Not playing a starter in the 4th quarter is a slap in the face to that person. When Dunleavy gets some more muscle on him, things will be different. Everyone pushes him around and can't get position to play defense. 20 pounds of muscle and he will be much better. Start Dunleavy give him 40 minutes a game. If he still is the same then we have an idea Pietrus maybe the guy we need. Personally I think Dunleavy has tons of potential and will have a much better year under Montgomery. I don't want to argue about Musselman anymore to you guys. I've already said what I think billions of times. You will not change my opinion. He in my eyes sucked last year. He was stubborn, lost his cool during most of the season, didn't adjust well, ignores rookies, brushed off management in a bad way, his staff besides Keith Smart were pretty bad and the dummy's wife came into the bookstore which I work at and bought a coaching basketball book. I know since I wrang her up and asked her if she knew Muss. Seriously I lost all respect for him this year and no one's argument is going to change that.
