Official Fire Monty Thread

No need to being this up until they lose their next game Balls lol! Amnesia prevalent up in here

Well I think it is safe to say some people jumped to conclusions after 2 games. We can all breath easier as Monty is not going anywhere now.

Emotional outbursts I get. Jumping to conclusions I get.

The dogged, neverending defense of the human, all too human, reactions as `correct' is what irritates me.

I still say fire him a horrible coach

It's not like we beat the Heat twice, come on. Monty has issues he still needs to correct.

Wow we beat Utah and Sixers, with the talent we got.. keep monty!!!

It is not about who we beat, it is the claims people made now all of a sudden looking to be false with Ryno back.

He MAKES the team take long two's, doesn't draw up plays for three's, and keeps us at a slow pace. All suddenly false.

Im happy he played rivers and not roberts in the sec half

About drawing up plays for threes:

Many fans were decrying the lack of three point shots. Through the first 9 games (those without Anderson), the team attempted 111 threes compared to 648 twos and 203 free throws, or 12.3 threes, 72 twos, and 22.6 free throws per game. In the two games since Anderson’s return, the rest of the team has attempted 13.5 threes, 56.5 twos, and 28.5 free throws. Anderson attempted 8 threes, 4.5 twos, and 1.5 free throws per game, bringing the Pelicans’ total to 21.5 threes, 61 twos, and 30 free throws per game.

. . .

Now, this is just a small sample, but the data shows something interesting: Anderson’s arrival increased the number of three point attempts by 1.2 per game for other players. One may be able to say the increase is merely noise, and I will not dispute that, but the 8 threes Anderson attempted upon his return simply were not taken by the rest of team during his absence.

Also, some will balk at the use of per game statistics over rates or per time measurements. The real issue is Anderson’s effect on the Pelicans, so per game statistics should be just fine for measuring his effect quickly.

The lack of three point attempts prior to Anderson’s return has been conjectured to be due poor coaching or a lack of respect for the three point shot. This data perhaps supports another theory I had, one which Mike mentioned on the podcast: Monty was simply installing his system, and given the short-term absence of Anderson, asked his players to play within the role set for them in larger plan, the logic perhaps being that it is better to get the system installed rather than tinker with roles more than necessary.

More at the link (bottom)

http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/20...21/a-new-game/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 42

About drawing up plays for threes:

Many fans were decrying the lack of three point shots. Through the first 9 games (those without Anderson), the team attempted 111 threes compared to 648 twos and 203 free throws, or 12.3 threes, 72 twos, and 22.6 free throws per game. In the two games since Anderson’s return, the rest of the team has attempted 13.5 threes, 56.5 twos, and 28.5 free throws. Anderson attempted 8 threes, 4.5 twos, and 1.5 free throws per game, bringing the Pelicans’ total to 21.5 threes, 61 twos, and 30 free throws per game.

. . .

Now, this is just a small sample, but the data shows something interesting: Anderson’s arrival increased the number of three point attempts by 1.2 per game for other players. One may be able to say the increase is merely noise, and I will not dispute that, but the 8 threes Anderson attempted upon his return simply were not taken by the rest of team during his absence.

Also, some will balk at the use of per game statistics over rates or per time measurements. The real issue is Anderson’s effect on the Pelicans, so per game statistics should be just fine for measuring his effect quickly.

The lack of three point attempts prior to Anderson’s return has been conjectured to be due poor coaching or a lack of respect for the three point shot. This data perhaps supports another theory I had, one which Mike mentioned on the podcast: Monty was simply installing his system, and given the short-term absence of Anderson, asked his players to play within the role set for them in larger plan, the logic perhaps being that it is better to get the system installed rather than tinker with roles more than necessary.

More at the link (bottom)

http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/20...21/a-new-game/

---

Good read, and thanks for the link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

I still say fire him a horrible coach

---

Be careful what you wish for


http://imgick.nola.com/home/nola-med...e0b22715c1.JPG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

It is not about who we beat, it is the claims people made now all of a sudden looking to be false with Ryno back.

He MAKES the team take long two's, doesn't draw up plays for three's, and keeps us at a slow pace. All suddenly false.

---

LOL no, offense does still looks stale and against the Jazz last night they over helped on players when it wasn't necessary. The only difference I saw from him was when we went back to this playing that style and it wasn't working he would call a time out to fix it where as b4 he let them to continue to play.

#MontysFault

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

Monty made some adjustments, sort of striking preemptively. It was either the start of the 3rd, or out of a timeout, can't remember which. But we started running full court traps for a few possessions in order to make them work for their buckets in the third(where we are notoriously stagnant), or when they were going on a run to sort of heat check them.

That was something I caught last night. Only once or twice, but it held us in position to win. Coaches can improve too, much like players. 11 games isn't definitively enough to say it won't happen though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 42

About drawing up plays for threes:

Many fans were decrying the lack of three point shots. Through the first 9 games (those without Anderson), the team attempted 111 threes compared to 648 twos and 203 free throws, or 12.3 threes, 72 twos, and 22.6 free throws per game. In the two games since Anderson’s return, the rest of the team has attempted 13.5 threes, 56.5 twos, and 28.5 free throws. Anderson attempted 8 threes, 4.5 twos, and 1.5 free throws per game, bringing the Pelicans’ total to 21.5 threes, 61 twos, and 30 free throws per game.

. . .

Now, this is just a small sample, but the data shows something interesting: Anderson’s arrival increased the number of three point attempts by 1.2 per game for other players. One may be able to say the increase is merely noise, and I will not dispute that, but the 8 threes Anderson attempted upon his return simply were not taken by the rest of team during his absence.

Also, some will balk at the use of per game statistics over rates or per time measurements. The real issue is Anderson’s effect on the Pelicans, so per game statistics should be just fine for measuring his effect quickly.

The lack of three point attempts prior to Anderson’s return has been conjectured to be due poor coaching or a lack of respect for the three point shot. This data perhaps supports another theory I had, one which Mike mentioned on the podcast: Monty was simply installing his system, and given the short-term absence of Anderson, asked his players to play within the role set for them in larger plan, the logic perhaps being that it is better to get the system installed rather than tinker with roles more than necessary.

More at the link (bottom)

http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/20...21/a-new-game/

---

Thanks, 42! Quality post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

I still say fire him a horrible coach

---

What makes him a horrible coach? Just crazy if we have 2 more wins than we do now this isn't even mentioned. I believe we are one of the youngest teams in the NBA if not the youngest. You don't think that is challenging for a coach? Also adding a PG and Tyreke who have barely had time to even learn their teammates names much less learn a system. So when we start winning I'm sure it won't have anything to do with Monty it will be all of the young players figuring it out themselves. Just funny to me people wanna say he's a horrible coach when they probably have no idea how to draw up one single play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

What makes him a horrible coach? Just crazy if we have 2 more wins than we do now this isn't even mentioned. I believe we are one of the youngest teams in the NBA if not the youngest. You don't think that is challenging for a coach? Also adding a PG and Tyreke who have barely had time to even learn their teammates names much less learn a system. So when we start winning I'm sure it won't have anything to do with Monty it will be all of the young players figuring it out themselves. Just funny to me people wanna say he's a horrible coach when they probably have no idea how to draw up one single play.

---

I'm harsh on him but I will admit he not as stubborn as I once thought. He has gotten better at calling Time outs and fixed up his defense system a bit and rotations. He just needs to continue to be more open than he was at the beginning of the season (which it still is) when it was about "my system".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

I'm harsh on him but I will admit he not as stubborn as I once thought. He has gotten better at calling Time outs and fixed up his defense system a bit and rotations. He just needs to continue to be more open than he was at the beginning of the season (which it still is) when it was about "my system".

---

Not saying you don't know how to call a play either just some people on here I seriously question when they are beating the table how terrible a coach he is. I do agree with you on the stubbornness sometimes that is one thing I have a problem with. I would also like to see him be a little more energetic and emotional to light some fire under his players. Im getting kind of tired of him staring at players like he's Pop instead of coaching them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

Not saying you don't know how to call a play either just some people on here I seriously question when they are beating the table how terrible a coach he is. I do agree with you on the stubbornness sometimes that is one thing I have a problem with. I would also like to see him be a little more energetic and emotional to light some fire under his players. Im getting kind of tired of him staring at players like he's Pop instead of coaching them.

---

I agree with no proven leader on this team and I wish people stop trying to make Jason smith that guy he needs to be. In late game situation or when we are behind he looks more confused and nervous than to rally his troops to make them believe they can win.

He wins the next two games on the schedule and we could be looking at a coach of the month candidate.

FIRE MONTYYYHHHHHHH

(sorry, it had been too long since someone had written it)

Don't worry, this thread will pick up steam again in December

Nah dw, next 3 games it will be back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

I'm harsh on him but I will admit he not as stubborn as I once thought. He has gotten better at calling Time outs and fixed up his defense system a bit and rotations. He just needs to continue to be more open than he was at the beginning of the season (which it still is) when it was about "my system".

---

He improved in 12 games after not improving in hundreds?

The truth is, that is you look hard enough, you can find numerous flaws in every game by a coach.

We look harder after losses, it seems.

I personally believe 90% of what coaches do comes in practice. You get them prepared to play in practice, and once the game starts, it is kinda out of your control. Can he help players develop proper habits in practice? Seems to have done a decent job with AD. I need more time to see how he helps Jrue, Gordon, and Evans mentally before I make a definitive evaluation of Monty. I think All-Star break of 2015 will be enough time for me to have enough data to make my evaluation.

Fans just need to sit back and breathe. Maybe hyperventilate a little of something bad happens

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

The truth is, that is you look hard enough, you can find numerous flaws in every game by a coach.

We look harder after losses, it seems.

I personally believe 90% of what coaches do comes in practice. You get them prepared to play in practice, and once the game starts, it is kinda out of your control. Can he help players develop proper habits in practice? Seems to have done a decent job with AD. I need more time to see how he helps Jrue, Gordon, and Evans mentally before I make a definitive evaluation of Monty. I think All-Star break of 2015 will be enough time for me to have enough data to make my evaluation.

---

You know people will say that davis was just too good and so he naturally developed on his own, and monty didn't really have a hand in it...it's inevitable

And some local fans just may want Dale Brown, or a Tim Floyd or even a Avery Johnson as their coach, just to feed their local tide mentality.

#Tragic

One of the things with getting rid of him, is you lose the work he's going to do with Jrue Holiday and Evans. He made Vasquez from a project to a solid starter. Holiday and Evans are already fringe All-Star talents, what could he do in a full offseason working with them? Vasquez's first year was nothing special, but after Monty had a lot of games to observe, Vasquez suddenly had a floater among other lil' touches.

Monty's worth isn't really in-game, it's out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurgan

You know people will say that davis was just too good and so he naturally developed on his own, and monty didn't really have a hand in it...it's inevitable

---

Thought the same thing as I was typing it. If he is good under Monty, it is because he was good before Monty. But for some reason, if he was bad before Monty and is still bad here, that is Monty's fault.

Don't get that logic

Davis would be really good with anyone as his coach.

I actually like the way they're playing...Forgive me for saying it...I'll take the slings and arrows...True, there are horrible quarters, and people forget how hyped up a player can become when facing his former team that didn't believe in him (Though he avg'd 3 ppg in 2 seasons). However, if the shoe were to fall, please leave GK where he sits...I'd take Jerry Sloan in a heartbeat. People can throw out that he had 2 HOF players on his Jazz team, but for me a great coach has a great system (See Nick Saban, Bill Belicheck, Sean Payton, Red Auerbach, Phil Jackson, etc.) and it's my belief that Jerry's system made Malone, Stockton, Hornacek, into quality players. I don't believe Monty has had the time to develop his own "system" yet. So, give me a great coach with a great system...Jerry Sloan....Imagine Stockton to Malone as HOliday to Davis....

Davis really shouldn't have been in that late. That's my one big complaint.

Monty I have to question you. Why was Davis in the game that late? We are very lucky he did not get injured tonight.

Actually, most players do not get injured in most minutes. You expect him to not get injured. You are unlucky if he does.

That said, Monty must have thought the minutes worth the risk. Minutes are not just about winning and losing that game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PowerPel

Monty I have to question you. Why was Davis in the game that late? We are very lucky he did not get injured tonight.

---

Are we? His odds of getting hurt in those 4-5 minutes are just as good as him getting hurt in any other 4-5 minutes stretch. Bottom line, the odds arent very high. On every possession, there is a very small chance that a player will get injured, but people are fine with coaches playing guys when it is close because there is an apparent benefit - a chance at a win.

But I am of the camp that playing your starters in a blowout loss can have a long term benefit as good as, if not better than a single win. Let those guys feel the embarressment and own that loss.

Plenty of things that this coaching staff can be criticized for. I dont think leaving starters in during a blowout is one of those things. Very common practice amongst some of the greatest coaches of all-time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Are we? His odds of getting hurt in those 4-5 minutes are just as good as him getting hurt in any other 4-5 minutes stretch. Bottom line, the odds arent very high. On every possession, there is a very small chance that a player will get injured, but people are fine with coaches playing guys when it is close because there is an apparent benefit - a chance at a win.

But I am of the camp that playing your starters in a blowout loss can have a long term benefit as good as, if not better than a single win. Let those guys feel the embarressment and own that loss.

Plenty of things that this coaching staff can be criticized for. I dont think leaving starters in during a blowout is one of those things. Very common practice amongst some of the greatest coaches of all-time.

---

So you are telling me you rather risk getting the starters getting injured in a blowout loss? Why put yourself in that position when you are already on the hot seat? Why not give the bench a chance at some minutes? Same scenario if it was a blowout win.

Because being hurt when the game matters is much better than when you can use hindsight to argue someone shouldn't be out there at all.

So what it makes no difference in the end, in one case you can use it against Monty.

I think the explanation is in that paragraph. Again, you risk injury every time you put a player on the court. Wins are obviously worth the small risk, but people don't seem to think teaching moments are. Some of the greatest coaches, if not all of them, disagree. This is a very common practice. It is not an immediate dividend or even a measureable one long term, so people only see the risk of injury with no possible reward.

Again, most great coaches throughout history would disagree that there is no reward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PowerPel

So you are telling me you rather risk getting the starters getting injured in a blowout loss? Why put yourself in that position when you are already on the hot seat? Why not give the bench a chance at some minutes? Same scenario if it was a blowout win.

---

in my thought, it's not a big deal.

why put starters or core 5 on the court in a blowout loss??

b/c they dont play well while against top team in the league

so they need more time to play together

it's not for a win

it's for the future

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Because being hurt when the game matters is much better than when you can use hindsight to argue someone shouldn't be out there at all.

So what it makes no difference in the end, in one case you can use it against Monty.

---

Exactly. The problem is there with Monty and people will use anything to exaggerate it. I saw Tony Parker out there with 7 minutes left and the Spurs up by 25+. Is Pop an idiot too?

Again, there are problems with Monty but lets address those problems, not just actively look to find new ones. Again, this is a VERY common practice. One that Pop has done for years. Let's move on to the bigger issues if we are going to get this thread active after every loss, while leaving it dormant after wins.

Face it if Davis would have gotten hurt as the announcers made it seem like his was injured this forum would have went baserk. National media would have questioned Monty's judgement. Davis is the our all-star and the heart of the organization. I do agree every play is a risk as we have seen with Derrick Rose. Don't put him in unnecessary risk is all I'm saying. Sean Payton understand this at least. Taking Brees out of the Dallas game when we were blowing them out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PowerPel

Face it if Davis would have gotten hurt as the announcers made it seem like his was injured this forum would have went baserk. National media would have questioned Monty's judgement. Davis is the our all-star and the heart of the organization. I do agree every play is a risk as we have seen with Derrick Rose. Don't put him in unnecessary risk is all I'm saying. Sean Payton understand this at least. Taking Brees out of the Dallas game when we were blowing them out.

---

Do you want a coach who makes his decisions based off what this forum or writers will think? Man, I think that might be the one thing that would terrify me the most.

Again, you keep saying unneccessary risk. Maybe YOU think it is unneccessary, but a lot of coaches do not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Do you want a coach who makes his decisions based off what this forum or writers will think? Man, I think that might be the one thing that would terrify me the most.

Again, you keep saying unneccessary risk. Maybe YOU think it is unneccessary, but a lot of coaches do not

---

And alot of coaches get fired because of that. Monty is on the hot seat well at least according to this forum.

Well, then Monty should throw away the logic of the great coaches of years past and go with the logic of Pelicans Report!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Well, then Monty should throw away the logic of the great coaches of years past and go with the logic of Pelicans Report!

---

Can't be any worse than what you got now. :)

Again, there is a lot wrong now. Let's concentrate on that. Not on a decision that plenty of great coaches believe in that "might have" been bad, but wasn't.

Focus on the right stuff.

btw, has there been any word that davis is ok? has anyone from the media asked if he is ok?

i am very pessimistic when it comes to injuries with this franchise

i mean i am assuming he is ok..but at the same time, i won't be surprised if he is out tomorrow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Again, there is a lot wrong now. Let's concentrate on that. Not on a decision that plenty of great coaches believe in that "might have" been bad, but wasn't.

Focus on the right stuff.

---

Are you putting Monty in with the great coaches? Okay fine I'll give Monty another free pass. How many free passes have we given Monty anyway?

I think we might have a reading comprehension problem here, but I am done with this one. Feast on Monty's flesh if it makes people feel better. Easier than acknowledging that our max contract SG played beyond terrible. One problem, in theory, is easily fixed. The other is not. Makes sense for people to want to hope it is an easy solution.