Fire Gentry ?? Then who?

[Pelicanidae]

It's just interesting to think about how coaches are judged.

I think what amazes me most is how little a lot of people are willing to talk about coaching at all.

Obviously, there's a lot of behind the scenes stuff that we, as fans, don't see. Head coaches have to manage personalities and foster atmosphere and promote more organisational goals, as well as handle a bunch of none-court-related stuff that we don't really get much insight on, if any.

But at the end of the day, the core role, the one for which they're being given all the money (Gentry does not get paid to be a glorified administrations assistant or a therapist) is the general style and philosophy of the team, and their management during games with regards to rotations, lineups, etc.

It's so difficult to find anyone who's willing to talk about that. Criticise the offense of this team, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Finch's thing. Criticise the defense, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Bzdelik. Criticise the lineups, that's injuries fault (regardless of whether that makes sense in some cases or not; certainly that's some of it, but I wouldn't say all). This isn't you personally, but it's largely the consensus view among Pels media that Alvin Gentry is ultimately responsible for pretty much nothing.

Which obviously isn't true. But that's how the conversation is generally taken. It's so strange, I cannot wrap my head around it.

[Fedupfan]

I think what amazes me most is how little a lot of people are willing to talk about coaching at all.

Obviously, there's a lot of behind the scenes stuff that we, as fans, don't see. Head coaches have to manage personalities and foster atmosphere and promote more organisational goals, as well as handle a bunch of none-court-related stuff that we don't really get much insight on, if any.

But at the end of the day, the core role, the one for which they're being given all the money (Gentry does not get paid to be a glorified administrations assistant or a therapist) is the general style and philosophy of the team, and their management during games with regards to rotations, lineups, etc.

It's so difficult to find anyone who's willing to talk about that. Criticise the offense of this team, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Finch's thing. Criticise the defense, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Bzdelik. Criticise the lineups, that's injuries fault (regardless of whether that makes sense in some cases or not; certainly that's some of it, but I wouldn't say all). This isn't you personally, but it's largely the consensus view among Pels media that Alvin Gentry is ultimately responsible for pretty much nothing.

Which obviously isn't true. But that's how the conversation is generally taken. It's so strange, I cannot wrap my head around it.

If it makes you feel better, I feel like Gentry is responsible for everything that’s going wrong. My reason is consistency. No matter what players are on the team, the same mistakes are made to lose games.

[ramsters60]

I think what amazes me most is how little a lot of people are willing to talk about coaching at all.

Obviously, there's a lot of behind the scenes stuff that we, as fans, don't see. Head coaches have to manage personalities and foster atmosphere and promote more organisational goals, as well as handle a bunch of none-court-related stuff that we don't really get much insight on, if any.

But at the end of the day, the core role, the one for which they're being given all the money (Gentry does not get paid to be a glorified administrations assistant or a therapist) is the general style and philosophy of the team, and their management during games with regards to rotations, lineups, etc.

It's so difficult to find anyone who's willing to talk about that. Criticise the offense of this team, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Finch's thing. Criticise the defense, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Bzdelik. Criticise the lineups, that's injuries fault (regardless of whether that makes sense in some cases or not; certainly that's some of it, but I wouldn't say all). This isn't you personally, but it's largely the consensus view among Pels media that Alvin Gentry is ultimately responsible for pretty much nothing.

Which obviously isn't true. But that's how the conversation is generally taken. It's so strange, I cannot wrap my head around it.

you hinted at it, but to me, one of the most important aspects of a head coach is figuring out who should be on the court with whom and when.... being proactive and dictating this aspect of the game rather than simply reacting to what the other coach/team does.... working out who sits when and who replaces them when rest is needed.... once again being proactive toward various situations and taking the initiative instead of just being reactionary.... sure, injuries dictate who you have to work with, but the bottom line is playing the hand you were dealt and just being better at this than the other guy is.....easy? no imperative? without a doubt if you want to come out on top.... so, with just this single aspect in mind, how does Gentry stack up?

[P_B_&_G]

You just went there didn’t you. I don’t even know how you even put Gentry in the same sentence as those guys.

Certainly you can with Kerr considering Gentry built that offense. Not to mention what would he look like without an insanely stocked roster? We are currently finding out.

Pop is on another level completely though.

[Pelicanidae]

you hinted at it, but to me, one of the most important aspects of a head coach is figuring out who should be on the court with whom and when.... being proactive and dictating this aspect of the game rather than simply reacting to what the other coach/team does.... working out who sits when and who replaces them when rest is needed.... once again being proactive toward various situations and taking the initiative instead of just being reactionary.... sure, injuries dictate who you have to work with, but the bottom line is playing the hand you were dealt and just being better at this than the other guy is.....easy? no imperative? without a doubt if you want to come out on top.... so, with just this single aspect in mind, how does Gentry stack up?

I think most of us agree on the fact that Gentry is terrible with his rotations and lineups. If nothing else, I believe that unites most of us.

[ramsters60]

I think most of us agree on the fact that Gentry is terrible with his rotations and lineups. If nothing else, I believe that unites most of us.

agreed...and point being, as you suggested, this is probably the one extremely important thing that couldn't possibly be put on any assistant.... if this part of coaching is a failure, it falls on only one person's shoulders...and for better or worse, rightfully so...so, back to Hammons....

[13 - 3]

Certainly you can with Kerr considering Gentry built that offense. Not to mention what would he look like without an insanely stocked roster? We are currently finding out.

Pop is on another level completely though.

Gentry did not build it nor did Kerr. It was Mark Jackson that built it.

[ColoradoCajun]

Finding a good coach is tough. They don't sprout up from the NCAA. They are hidden gems. Hiding as assistant coaches/ development coaches not college coaches.

You can watch the story behind Nick Nurse. It's beyond difficult for unknowns to breakthrough into the coaching ranks.

Genry said before the Lakers game that the team wouldn't run any box or triangle defenses. There was just a video highlighting how well Nurse has used those strategies.

[djrnno]

I do know this , Missing wide open shots , blowing layups multiple times , boneheaded TO's and bad times , lazy passes inbounds , not calling TO when have one and you can't get the ball in bounds, Is NOT the HC's fault . You can blame him for lineups and rotations but those things are on the players. You can coach all you want but players have to be held accountable . If we replace AG in the summer it won't really matter to me but that coach better be able to coach the stupid out of some of these players and have them come through at clutch time . and not sure if you'll ever get much more out of crisis or carnival Holiday

[Ivan Balakhonov]

I do know this , Missing wide open shots , blowing layups multiple times , boneheaded TO's and bad times , lazy passes inbounds , not calling TO when have one and you can't get the ball in bounds, Is NOT the HC's fault . You can blame him for lineups and rotations but those things are on the players. You can coach all you want but players have to be held accountable . If we replace AG in the summer it won't really matter to me but that coach better be able to coach the stupid out of some of these players and have them come through at clutch time . and not sure if you'll ever get much more out of crisis or carnival Holiday

I partly disagree. When you have a stable and functional system and your players are well drilled and fear the consequences of stupid actions, you'll get fewer turnovers. I believe that many of our mistakes result from the lack of proper discipline. And it's a head coach's task to fix the issue.

[Mythrol]

I think what amazes me most is how little a lot of people are willing to talk about coaching at all.

Obviously, there's a lot of behind the scenes stuff that we, as fans, don't see. Head coaches have to manage personalities and foster atmosphere and promote more organisational goals, as well as handle a bunch of none-court-related stuff that we don't really get much insight on, if any.

But at the end of the day, the core role, the one for which they're being given all the money (Gentry does not get paid to be a glorified administrations assistant or a therapist) is the general style and philosophy of the team, and their management during games with regards to rotations, lineups, etc.

It's so difficult to find anyone who's willing to talk about that. Criticise the offense of this team, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Finch's thing. Criticise the defense, you get told oh that's not Gentry's fault, that's Bzdelik. Criticise the lineups, that's injuries fault (regardless of whether that makes sense in some cases or not; certainly that's some of it, but I wouldn't say all). This isn't you personally, but it's largely the consensus view among Pels media that Alvin Gentry is ultimately responsible for pretty much nothing.

Which obviously isn't true. But that's how the conversation is generally taken. It's so strange, I cannot wrap my head around it.

I haven't seen a single person say Gentry isn't to fault for the offense because that's Finch's thing. I've seen people say Gentry isn't at fault for defense but offensively I think everyone knows this is entirely Gentry's system.

But again I go back to, are Pop and Kerr actually good coaches who have been decimated by injuries or are they bad coaches who were covered over by star players? I just find it amusing that Gentry has had very similar injury issues as those two coaches but he is judged as entirely at fault while they largely get a free pass.

Again. I'm not saying Gentry shouldn't be fired. I wanted him fired last summer just to wash the stink away from everything and have an entirely fresh start. And I realize Kerr and Pop get a free pass for their history and already bringing rings to their team. I'm more looking at the macro level of coaches who are in very similar situations but some are called for firing and others are acknowledged as being decimated by injuries.

At the end of the day coaches are judged off their record whether that's fair or not. I personally am just ready for a change in philosophy for the team. While it sucks injuries have mared Gentry's tenure here, that didn't save Demps and it shouldn't save Gentry. End of year I want someone new. About the only thing that would change me feeling this way is if we made a deep playoff run.

[Pelicanidae]

I haven't seen a single person say Gentry isn't to fault for the offense because that's Finch's thing. I've seen people say Gentry isn't at fault for defense but offensively I think everyone knows this is entirely Gentry's system.

Yeah, to be fair to you, that is generally more of a Twitter thing than a thing people say on this board. On this board, people tend to just say ''oh we missed shots! Gentry can't stop the players missing shots!'' which is true but also irrelevant because more often than not, it's not the fact that the shots were make or miss that's being criticised. It's the style of shots that are being taken, and their frequency. I don't care whether JJ Redick's off the dribble contested 16 foot shot goes: that shot should not exist in our team's offensive vocabulary, and that is on the coaches to scrub out.

But again I go back to, are Pop and Kerr actually good coaches who have been decimated by injuries or are they bad coaches who were covered over by star players? I just find it amusing that Gentry has had very similar injury issues as those two coaches but he is judged as entirely at fault while they largely get a free pass.

Kerr, I agree with. I don't think, and never have thought, that he's an elite coach. He was gifted with a world-class roster, and was thoroughly outcoached by both Ty Lue at points, and Nick Nurse last year. And Ty Lue isn't a great coach either

But the reason Pop gets the benefit of the doubt when his team is playing badly is that he made the playoffs for 20 straight years with various rosters and moving pieces, including when absolutely nobody thought he would. Remember when Duncan retired and everyone was saying that this is finally the year, and then the Spurs made the playoffs again? Or when Parker left, and people did the same? Or when Kawhi sat out a whole year and they still made the playoffs? Or when Kawhi straight up left to Toronto, and they still made the playoffs? That roster didn't make the playoffs off the back of 'star players', I'm pretty certain. Pop gets the benefit of the doubt because he's been a proven winner for 2 decades regardless of what lineups he's been forced to use. Gentry doesn't because he's a career loser unless he has 50/40/90 Nash giving him 16 and 11. That's not particularly surprising.

At the end of the day coaches are judged off their record whether that's fair or not. I personally am just ready for a change in philosophy for the team. While it sucks injuries have mared Gentry's tenure here, that didn't save Demps and it shouldn't save Gentry. End of year I want someone new. About the only thing that would change me feeling this way is if we made a deep playoff run.

I agree with that. Injuries suck, nobody denies it, and Gentry can't control whether Boogie's ankle explodes or whether Elfrid Payton breaks his finger: that's beyond him. The problem is that we never have a backup plan. For Gentry, whenever we have an injury that's the season lost, pretty much. He has one strategy, and when it works it looks good but that's rarer than not. He's never been able to make this team look consistently good, regardless of the roster, and he sucks in-game.

So yeah, let him go. If everyone loves him that much, keep him on as a consultant or something, but he should not be coaching this team come next October.

[JJackisangry]

Gentry needs to change the way we play, or we need to change the coach (we are almost assuredly going to at the end of the season anyways). Also, he has proven once more that he is more concerned with saving his job than he is with developing our talent. NAW and Frank shouldn’t be frozen out if we are losing games. It is f’ing pointless.

[Pelicanidae]

Gentry needs to change the way we play, or we need to change the coach (we are almost assuredly going to at the end of the season anyways). Also, he has proven once more that he is more concerned with saving his job than he is with developing our talent. NAW and Frank shouldn’t be frozen out if we are losing games. It is f’ing pointless.

Another way that Pop is superior to Gentry: Pop doesn't coach to win if you're down big with almost no time left.

Not referring to this specific game, because obviously this one was fairly close, but we've all seen it: we're down 16 going into the 4th, and it's just not there. We aren't closing the lead, it's either staying the same or slightly growing. Maybe we cut it temporarily, before they hit three triples in our face and we're back down again. 8 minutes left with a 15+ point deficit to overcome. What does Gentry do? Nothing, really, just insert another guard and take a bunch more threes!

What does Pop do? He gives it up as a bad job. Pulls the guys who have played heavy heavy minutes and inserts the youth. Sure, they'll lose, but they'll get actual playing time without having their mistakes ruin a game and if they happen to get it close then that's valuable development together. No need to put 40 minutes on your lead guys when the game's lost.

[luckyman]

If you fire Gentry then you have to get rid of the whole staff. I've only said if you blame Gentry for the issues this team has, then Finch and Bzdelik also share some of that blame.

Basically, you can't fire Gentry, then promote Finch and expect anything to be different.

[Pelicanidae]

If you fire Gentry then you have to get rid of the whole staff. I've only said if you blame Gentry for the issues this team has, then Finch and Bzdelik also share some of that blame.

Basically, you can't fire Gentry, then promote Finch and expect anything to be different.

Generally a coach is also in charge of their staff. It's pretty common for a new coach to come in, and bring a new staff with them.

I'd expect that to happen if we fired Gentry. I could see some lee-way though; Bzdelik has a good history, it's fairly possible that a new coach coming in with a new overall philosophy would gel better with that than Gentry does, who knows?

The only person I'd really want to keep on is Fred Vinson. He's done a lot of good work.

[Mythrol]

Another reason I don't want to fire Gentry mid-season. I don't want Gayle to become attached to another coach because of how he handled "adversity" and then we end up with one of the assistants being promoted. I want a competent, comprehensive coaching search this summer and to allow them to bring in their entire staff.

[Fedupfan]

Another reason I don't want to fire Gentry mid-season. I don't want Gayle to become attached to another coach because of how he handled "adversity" and then we end up with one of the assistants being promoted. I want a competent, comprehensive coaching search this summer and to allow them to bring in their entire staff.

This is one of the best points for keeping Gentry. I almost don’t want to fire him now. He is just so darn awful at his job.

[Pelicanidae]

This is one of the best points for keeping Gentry. I almost don’t want to fire him now. He is just so darn awful at his job.

It's weird, I've found myself occasionally hoping we don't win games. Because I feel like if we somehow manage to scrape out 38 wins or something, they'll use that relative success to keep Gentry, and I don't know how much more of him I can handle.

Do you know how backwards that is? Just me watching games, seeing them get close, and feeling ''well it would suck if we won this cause Gentry would see it as vindicating his awful decisions tonight''.

[da ThRONe]

Another reason I don't want to fire Gentry mid-season. I don't want Gayle to become attached to another coach because of how he handled "adversity" and then we end up with one of the assistants being promoted. I want a competent, comprehensive coaching search this summer and to allow them to bring in their entire staff.

Gayle needs to butt out or we have bigger issues. James Dolan/Dan Snyder type issues.

[Taker597]

It's weird, I've found myself occasionally hoping we don't win games. Because I feel like if we somehow manage to scrape out 38 wins or something, they'll use that relative success to keep Gentry, and I don't know how much more of him I can handle.

Do you know how backwards that is? Just me watching games, seeing them get close, and feeling ''well it would suck if we won this cause Gentry would see it as vindicating his awful decisions tonight''.

It's like if we start off hot at the 3pt line and build a solid 15+ lead. Instead of anticipating the laws of averages and going for easy points or match up defensively. Gentry goes super small with 4gs and calls for 40 3s and blows lead trying to score an impossible 150 points every night.

[Taker597]

Gayle needs to butt out or we have bigger issues. James Dolan/Dan Snyder type issues.

That’s why she hired Griffin. I hope she let's him do his job.

[Pelicanidae]

It's like if we start off hot at the 3pt line and build a solid 15+ lead. Instead of anticipating the laws of averages and going for easy points or match up defensively. Gentry goes super small with 4gs and calls for 40 3s and blows lead trying to score an impossible 150 points every night.

Basically.

I just posted in the game thread a breakdown of our shot-attempts, and you're pretty much right.

Since November 22nd, 51% of our 4th quarter shot attempts have been 3 pointers. Only 18% of our offense in the 4th quarter comes from at-rim attempts. This is despite at-rim attempts generating almost 2x the points per shot value for us during this stretch. We take more shots from the midrange than we do at the rim. None of this is good basketball.

[13 - 3]

Another reason I don't want to fire Gentry mid-season. I don't want Gayle to become attached to another coach because of how he handled "adversity" and then we end up with one of the assistants being promoted. I want a competent, comprehensive coaching search this summer and to allow them to bring in their entire staff.

Would Finch really be that bad? I think he got some HC interviews last year.

[JJackisangry]

Basically.

I just posted in the game thread a breakdown of our shot-attempts, and you're pretty much right.

Since November 22nd, 51% of our 4th quarter shot attempts have been 3 pointers. Only 18% of our offense in the 4th quarter comes from at-rim attempts. This is despite at-rim attempts generating almost 2x the points per shot value for us during this stretch. We take more shots from the midrange than we do at the rim. None of this is good basketball.

We don’t just take open spot up 3’s either. We take 3’s off the dribble and often throw up some wild shots. Whilst JJ is incredible at making said crazy shots, he kind of highlights the problem. We don’t have good enough movement or presence in the paint to create open looks regardless of our potential at hitting 3’s. So why on Earth are we just jacking them up?