GENTRY FIRING COULD BE VERY SOON!

[msusousaphone]

The fact that we're young and inexperienced is one thing: I said to people before the season just as much as you did that even if we have the roster for a top 5 defense (which I think we do, at least on paper) it would take until at least Christmas before the defense started clicking before defense is something that relies heavily on chemistry and experience which takes time to develop.

That said, there is a tangible difference between a defense that is clearly not ready and underperforming, and a defense which is just badly put together in the first place. For the majority of the season, that's what we've had so far: a defense that just isn't constructed with any kind of consideration for the roster we actually have had. It's easy to say that Favors is out, so the defense is going to be bad. Sure. But do you not think that if you've designed your defensive scheme to absolutely require one single guy, without whom everything collapses, maybe your defensive strategy is not well adapted to the team overall?

Losing Favors was always going to make the defense take a hit. He's an elite defensive big. But should it be the difference between a top 5 defense and a bottom 5 defense? God no.

Like I said, we have people coming back from injury and we have an easier schedule from hereon out, and people are going to allow that fact to fool them, as if the first half of the year never happened and as if Gentry hasn't produced awful defensive teams for 4 of the last 5 years, and it's going to end up with Gentry getting kept on beyond this season.

You were one of the cautious voices leading into the season that tempered my optimism.

I'm going to call your bluff a bit and say I don't really think you know how the defense was put together. Not in an MM way, I admit that I don't either, but what we as fans saw was a brand new scheme being run by mostly inexperienced players and missing a key cog to the system. Favors and Zion would essentially play the same role in this defense....they were both gone and there is no one on this roster that has the skillset to replace them.

So yeah, they were having to make giant adjustments with young and inexperienced players who in large part don't even know each other to a brand new scheme missing it's very important anchor. We've really only been seeing the actual scheme for several weeks and we also lack good knowledgeable inside reporters with this franchise to get bits and pieces of info from players and coaches to parcel it all together.

People are trivializing these factors....but....how can that be trivialized?

I think, at this point, most people are just in camps. The Fire Gentry Friends. The People's Party of Individuals Who Hate Lonzo Ball. They'll just stay in their camps no matter how much evidence gets shown counter to their stance. I mean, BI is having an all-star season and just a few weeks ago he was being denounced with the "he'll regress back to his mean" nonsense.

Your counter post supports that, it minimizes but agrees that Gentry went into this season with factors making it impossible for him to succeed....you even stated you warned people of this....and now that the ship is turning around.....he gets no credit?

IF this defensive trend continues and we sneak into a 7 or 8 seed.....that's not just good coaching.....that's stellar coaching.

[Pelicanidae]

You were one of the cautious voices leading into the season that tempered my optimism.

I'm going to call your bluff a bit and say I don't really think you know how the defense was put together.

Okay. I'm not really going to argue with you. If you want to run with ''yeah well, tbh you don't know what you're talking about'' then that's fine but it's not the kind of thing that's worth dignifying with a counter argument.

So yeah, they were having to make giant adjustments with young and inexperienced players who in large part don't even know each other to a brand new scheme missing it's very important anchor. We've really only been seeing the actual scheme for several weeks and we also lack good knowledgeable inside reporters with this franchise to get bits and pieces of info from players and coaches to parcel it all together.

People are trivializing these factors....but....how can that be trivialized?

It's not trivialising them, it's understanding that every team has issues with chemistry, continuity, etc, and many of them have issues with youth as well, and they still manage to be better than we are on defense. It's easy to say that this isn't the case, that we've had more injuries than everyone else, and maybe to an extent that is true but we still sucked when the only person out (obviously aside from Zion and Miller, who have been out all season) was Favors. If you have designed a defense so that an injury to one of your 3 centres completely and utterly drops you from a top 5 defense to a bottom 5 defense, your defense isn't constructed well enough or with enough flexibility. Sorry, that's just the reality of the situation. You can't rest your entire defense on one guy. That's stupid.

Also, just as a response to the

I mean, BI is having an all-star season and just a few weeks ago he was being denounced with the "he'll regress back to his mean" nonsense.

comment... Ingram has regressed, what are you talking about? When I said that he would regress, he was shooting 48% from 3 on more than 7 attempts per game, and 60% from midrange.

He's now shooting 40.9% from 3 on 5.7 attempts per game, and his midrange efficiency has dropped to a far more sustainable 45.8%.

That's regressing. Which is what I said he would do. If you drop 7% from your 3pt shooting and 14% from your midrange shooting, that's regression. 40.9% from 3 and 45.8% from midrange is still very very good, no question, but it's regressed from 48% and 60%. I honestly don't see how you can debate that.

[luigi modelo]

MM is Rowdy Roddy Piper, and the board is better with him around, regardless of one's personal feelings towards him. It's pretty hilarious to observe

[Pelicanidae]

MM is Rowdy Roddy Piper, and the board is better with him around, regardless of one's personal feelings towards him. It's pretty hilarious to observe

That's giving him far too much credit. Roddy Piper was good.

[6warddude]

if kat goes to GS for russell, would that trade help either team win more games?..

[Pelicanidae]

if kat goes to GS for russell, would that trade help either team win more games?..

Probably not, tbh.

Golden State would add a stunningly effective offensive piece, but also lose their only real lead guard. Would set them up well for when Curry/Klay return though.

Wolves would add a lead guard of the kind they've been needing for a while, but they'd also lose their best player and leave themselves extremely thin at the 5.

I'm pretty sure that the reason Minnesota wants D-Lo is to pair him with KAT though, since they're friends. Hard to imagine them trading him for Russell, especially when KAT is in year 1 of a 5 year extension: they're in no rush to move him even if he does want out.

[msusousaphone]

Okay. I'm not really going to argue with you. If you want to run with ''yeah well, tbh you don't know what you're talking about'' then that's fine but it's not the kind of thing that's worth dignifying with a counter argument.

And with that, I am not attacking your overall basketball acumen. I think yours is higher than mine. More that I really would like someone to go into the Xs and Os of our scheme. I think the lack of good beat writers with inside info and high basketball IQ leads to the Pels fans having a drought of insight into team strategies and schematics. I'm really hoping in a masochistic way that you do go into the Xs and Os of our defensive scheme and slay me (in the debate) but also leave me more educated on our defensive strategy.

[6warddude]

Probably not, tbh.

Golden State would add a stunningly effective offensive piece, but also lose their only real lead guard. Would set them up well for when Curry/Klay return though.

Wolves would add a lead guard of the kind they've been needing for a while, but they'd also lose their best player and leave themselves extremely thin at the 5.

I'm pretty sure that the reason Minnesota wants D-Lo is to pair him with KAT though, since they're friends. Hard to imagine them trading him for Russell, especially when KAT is in year 1 of a 5 year extension: they're in no rush to move him even if he does want out.

but they're saying kat wants out of minny..he has not come out publicly and said it but he want out......minny was trying to get d-lo so if kat does get moved and GS is the place then im sure minny would get d-lo in the trade.....im just looking at teams ahead of us thats trying to make moves and see how we would stack up to pass them...

[Pelicanidae]

And with that, I am not attacking your overall basketball acumen. I think yours is higher than mine. More that I really would like someone to go into the Xs and Os of our scheme. I think the lack of good beat writers with inside info and high basketball IQ leads to the Pels fans having a drought of insight into team strategies and schematics. I'm really hoping in a masochistic way that you do go into the Xs and Os of our defensive scheme and slay me (in the debate) but also leave me more educated on our defensive strategy.

Without digging in too deep, the main issue that really plagued us for a large portion of Favors missed time was Gentry/Bzdeliks desire to play with a big up front. Before the season started they stressed this multiple times in interviews that, contrary to prior years with AD and co, Gentry wanted a more aggressive defensive style that pulled the big out of the paint forcing them to recover when the paint was driven on.

With Favors at least, that's fine. Favors is a smart, experienced get with plenty of defensive instinct. The game is perfectly within his understanding to the extent that he can do that. However, with Hayes, this isn't the case. Hayes is a talented defensive prospect but he's not there yet and the speed of recognition required to run a bigs-out strategy is beyond him right now. For more than a dozen games, Gentry stuck with using Hayes as if he was Favors and it left him out of position far too frequently and gave up open layup after open layup.

At some point around Favors return, the Pelicans switched defensively back to using a drop coverage. Not only is Favors fully capable of running that too, but it also gives Hayes a split second more time to read the play as it develops and make a decision. It's a small time difference but one that can matter in a game played at NBA speeds. Frankly, it's the right move to make. It's more conservative, will probably force fewer turnovers, but defending the rim should always be priority number one on any team.

What's interesting is why this change has been made. I've heard recently (although it was on Twitter so I cannot attest to the veracity of the claim: could just be random people talking nonsense) that Gentry approached Jrue and Favors and asked them what they believed was causing issues in the defense and that he took their preferences into account. If this is true, it would explain us switching towards a style that's slightly more in Jrue and Favors' wheelhouse, but it may not be true at all. This is just a rumour. If it's true, it's the kind of thing you could see as a positive or a negative depending on your outlook. Either it's a positive because Gentry is getting communication going in the locker room and adjusting his schemes to suit his personnel, which is good. Or it's a negative because Gentry basically needs the players to coach the system and design the scheme themselves.

[JJackisangry]

Without digging in too deep, the main issue that really plagued us for a large portion of Favors missed time was Gentry/Bzdeliks desire to play with a big up front. Before the season started they stressed this multiple times in interviews that, contrary to prior years with AD and co, Gentry wanted a more aggressive defensive style that pulled the big out of the paint forcing them to recover when the paint was driven on.

With Favors at least, that's fine. Favors is a smart, experienced get with plenty of defensive instinct. The game is perfectly within his understanding to the extent that he can do that. However, with Hayes, this isn't the case. Hayes is a talented defensive prospect but he's not there yet and the speed of recognition required to run a bigs-out strategy is beyond him right now. For more than a dozen games, Gentry stuck with using Hayes as if he was Favors and it left him out of position far too frequently and gave up open layup after open layup.

At some point around Favors return, the Pelicans switched defensively back to using a drop coverage. Not only is Favors fully capable of running that too, but it also gives Hayes a split second more time to read the play as it develops and make a decision. It's a small time difference but one that can matter in a game played at NBA speeds. Frankly, it's the right move to make. It's more conservative, will probably force fewer turnovers, but defending the rim should always be priority number one on any team.

What's interesting is why this change has been made. I've heard recently (although it was on Twitter so I cannot attest to the veracity of the claim: could just be random people talking nonsense) that Gentry approached Jrue and Favors and asked them what they believed was causing issues in the defense and that he took their preferences into account. If this is true, it would explain us switching towards a style that's slightly more in Jrue and Favors' wheelhouse, but it may not be true at all. This is just a rumour. If it's true, it's the kind of thing you could see as a positive or a negative depending on your outlook. Either it's a positive because Gentry is getting communication going in the locker room and adjusting his schemes to suit his personnel, which is good. Or it's a negative because Gentry basically needs the players to coach the system and design the scheme themselves.

This was my biggest complaint when people stated that Gentry had no say or control over the defensive side. We played to force turnovers and in turn get transition baskets, which proved to be suicicdal for this young team. So I need to ask, why is it taking till now for this change to be made?

In the end, talent will triumph over bad coaching. Our last couple of wins are a bit hollow as we have played against really weakened teams, but in fairness, we played through a lot of injuries as well. And Favors is definitely a sight for sore eyes.

[Pelicanidae]

This was my biggest complaint when people stated that Gentry had no say or control over the defensive side. We played to force turnovers and in turn get transition baskets, which proved to be suicicdal for this young team. So I need to ask, why is it taking till now for this change to be made?

In the end, talent will triumph over bad coaching. Our last couple of wins are a bit hollow as we have played against really weakened teams, but in fairness, we played through a lot of injuries as well. And Favors is definitely a sight for sore eyes.

Rim defense is so important that if you were only allowed to defend one spot on the court, the rim should be it.

And in reality, that's kind of what's happening The number 1 defensive team in the NBA is the Milwaukee Bucks. The Milwaukee Bucks are also #1 in the NBA at rim-protection. They're 4th in the league in blocks. They allow only 29% of opponent's FGAs to come within 6 feet of the hoop, which leads the league (by comparison, we are 21st in the NBA, allowing 36.4% of opponent FGAs to come within 6 feet of the rim).

And on those at-rim attempts, the Bucks hold opponents to 9.4% below their averages; the runner-up for best OFG% at-rim is Toronto, who only hold their opponents 4.7% below their averages. So, exactly half. And you fall off to 3.2% below when you go to the 3rd ranked team, the Lakers. For comparison, we allow opponents to shoot 1.6% above their averages on at-rim attempts.

By contrast, the Bucks let guys shoot threes. Opposing teams shoot 2.2% better than their averages from behind the arc against the Bucks. Yet they're the league's best defense. How?

Simple. Gotta protect the rim. Do that well enough, and everything else becomes secondary. If you can only take away one shot, make it the at-rim attempt. The lay-up/dunk is the league's most efficient shot. Remove it as an option for your opponent and your defense soars even if you aren't great on the perimeter.

Just for comparison, since Favors has come back we've held opponents to 4.9% below their averages at the rim, which is 5th among all teams during that span. So yes, Favors coming back and us returning to a drop-scheme does seem to be helping. Of course the usual caveats about Houston missing their big 3 and Indiana missing Brogdon and stuff all apply.

[JJackisangry]

Rim defense is so important that if you were only allowed to defend one spot on the court, the rim should be it.

And in reality, that's kind of what's happening The number 1 defensive team in the NBA is the Milwaukee Bucks. The Milwaukee Bucks are also #1 in the NBA at rim-protection. They're 4th in the league in blocks. They allow only 29% of opponent's FGAs to come within 6 feet of the hoop, which leads the league (by comparison, we are 21st in the NBA, allowing 36.4% of opponent FGAs to come within 6 feet of the rim).

And on those at-rim attempts, the Bucks hold opponents to 9.4% below their averages; the runner-up for best OFG% at-rim is Toronto, who only hold their opponents 4.7% below their averages. So, exactly half. And you fall off to 3.2% below when you go to the 3rd ranked team, the Lakers. For comparison, we allow opponents to shoot 1.6% above their averages on at-rim attempts.

By contrast, the Bucks let guys shoot threes. Opposing teams shoot 2.2% better than their averages from behind the arc against the Bucks. Yet they're the league's best defense. How?

Simple. Gotta protect the rim. Do that well enough, and everything else becomes secondary. If you can only take away one shot, make it the at-rim attempt. The lay-up/dunk is the league's most efficient shot. Remove it as an option for your opponent and your defense soars even if you aren't great on the perimeter.

Just for comparison, since Favors has come back we've held opponents to 4.9% below their averages at the rim, which is 5th among all teams during that span. So yes, Favors coming back and us returning to a drop-scheme does seem to be helping. Of course the usual caveats about Houston missing their big 3 and Indiana missing Brogdon and stuff all apply.

You just have to live with the 3 point shot (close out, but don’t give up the interior). We have given up so many dunks and easy layups this season that it makes me cry. If we had run a simpler scheme from the start, we’d be much better off. Everything you’ve said pretty much backs that up.

When you play defense to create turnovers, you’re rotations have to be perfect and timely. Even when you create those turnovers, you have to finish your opportunities, and we didn’t have the composure we needed to take advantage of that. It’s criminal that we have taken so long to address this. I think Gentry is a bit too obsessed with the whole PPG aspect. It doesn’t matter if you score 140 if the opponent puts up 150.

[Pelicanidae]

You just have to live with the 3 point shot (close out, but don’t give up the interior). We have given up so many dunks and easy layups this season that it makes me cry. If we had run a simpler scheme from the start, we’d be much better off. Everything you’ve said pretty much backs that up.

When you play defense to create turnovers, you’re rotations have to be perfect and timely. Even when you create those turnovers, you have to finish your opportunities, and we didn’t have the composure we needed to take advantage of that. It’s criminal that we have taken so long to address this. I think Gentry is a bit too obsessed with the whole PPG aspect. It doesn’t matter if you score 140 if the opponent puts up 150.

Well, exactly. The thing about the 3pt shot is that you can't really defend it, not in the same way that you can defend an interior shot. If you're a big man and someone charges in at the rim for a dunk, some degree of contact is expected. There's a right way to do it, by staying vertical and such, but contact alone is fine. There's space you can absorb and angles you can block. The 3pt shot isn't like that: you can't do anything really except try and get your hand in the right position to make it inconvenient. Blocked 3s are incredibly rare.

The correct way to defend a 3pt shot is by forcing a pass or a drive. Once the shot has been taken, there's nothing you can do about it. It's going in or it's not. You just have to live with that.

Rim defense is the priority. It has to be. It looks like the coaching staff, whether that's Gentry or Bzdelik or both, have finally conceded that, and if they stick to it we should see some defensive improvements even when we aren't getting lucky on opponents missing anymore. I'm happy with that. Sucks that it took 'em 25 games to figure it out or whatever, but still, I'll take it.

[msusousaphone]

See, that's my point exactly. You guys say that it's all about rim protection.......but our two main defensive stalwarts were out. That's like saying "we just need to get Voldemort" when Harry Potter isn't around. He's the damn horcrux! Dae even said, "since Favors has been back...." and then goes on to cite how much better things have been since Favors has been back, like that doesn't actually support Gentry. That whole paragraph was essentially saying that he didn't have the necessary pieces to put together a good D.

We had Hayes. He played great for a rookie. But he would constantly get pulled out of position and skip the rim protection. Gentry constantly talked about how guys weren't staying disciplined on D and would get out of position. That was a lot of it. Behind Hayes....we had ZERO rim protectors. So you can't just say that you would simply protect the rim. You would have had no players with the skillset to do that adequately.

It's like, people say Gentry sucks, but when pressed about specifics, they make points that support Gentry not actually sucking, but that the pieces weren't their to make a finished puzzle.

Saying they "conceded" to rim protecting is....just....man....there's clearly a bias there. I think most people without that bias can look at the season and say, "they got Favors back. Now the anchor of that D can help the team rim protect".

[Pelicanidae]

See, that's my point exactly. You guys say that it's all about rim protection.......but our two main defensive stalwarts were out. That's like saying "we just need to get Voldemort" when Harry Potter isn't around. He's the damn horcrux! Dae even said, "since Favors has been back...." and then goes on to cite how much better things have been since Favors has been back, like that doesn't actually support Gentry. That whole paragraph was essentially saying that he didn't have the necessary pieces to put together a good D.

We had Hayes. He played great for a rookie. But he would constantly get pulled out of position and skip the rim protection. Gentry constantly talked about how guys weren't staying disciplined on D and would get out of position. That was a lot of it. Behind Hayes....we had ZERO rim protectors. So you can't just say that you would simply protect the rim. You would have had no players with the skillset to do that adequately. .

That's all very well and good but have you considered reading the parts of my posts where I literally said that Hayes' primary skill was rim protection rather than perimeter D, and that the bigs-out strategy we were using that had Hayes so consistently out of position is the exact same bigs-out strategy that Gentry proclaimed in pre-season that he wanted us to be using? He championed it multiple times in post-practice interviews, in media availabilty, etc. This wasn't a secret, he specifically said multiple times that he wanted us playing a bigs-out system, to be aggressive, and to move away from the drop-scheme we had used in the past.

We should have been using a drop-scheme soon as Favors went out, because Hayes did not have the experience to run the same system Favors had. I pointed it out, Shamit pointed it out in Twitter, others have pointed it out. This was not some mystery to anyone except, apparently, Gentry, who completely failed to make this adjustment until we'd already lost 13 in a row and had Favors back. Gentry had decided on his strategy in the middle of October and it took him until mid-December to make an adjustment. That's not good enough.

It's easy to say ''oh yeah well, of course the D sucked, we were running a strategy we didn't have the personnel for because Favors was out!!!'' and act as if that absolves Gentry, but that completely ignores the fact that it was Gentry's choice to run that strategy in the first place, and he knows precisely what personnel we have. What, did nobody tell him Favors was out? Did he just not know? Come on now.

[JJackisangry]

See, that's my point exactly. You guys say that it's all about rim protection.......but our two main defensive stalwarts were out. That's like saying "we just need to get Voldemort" when Harry Potter isn't around. He's the damn horcrux! Dae even said, "since Favors has been back...." and then goes on to cite how much better things have been since Favors has been back, like that doesn't actually support Gentry. That whole paragraph was essentially saying that he didn't have the necessary pieces to put together a good D.

We had Hayes. He played great for a rookie. But he would constantly get pulled out of position and skip the rim protection. Gentry constantly talked about how guys weren't staying disciplined on D and would get out of position. That was a lot of it. Behind Hayes....we had ZERO rim protectors. So you can't just say that you would simply protect the rim. You would have had no players with the skillset to do that adequately.

It's like, people say Gentry sucks, but when pressed about specifics, they make points that support Gentry not actually sucking, but that the pieces weren't their to make a finished puzzle.

Saying they "conceded" to rim protecting is....just....man....there's clearly a bias there. I think most people without that bias can look at the season and say, "they got Favors back. Now the anchor of that D can help the team rim protect".

I’m sorry but if you keep making silly analogies and paper thin arguments to make excuses for this guy, I can’t take you seriously. Of course I’m biased. I’ve witnessed this crap throughout Gentry’s entire tenure. Bias aside, the guy is 11-23. You don’t even have a leg to stand on man. If you support Gentry, make your argument and stop expecting others to agree with you. If you still think this guy has what it takes, good for you. You are allowed that opinion.

By the by, you are obviously biased for Gentry. Just saying. Stop the sillyness

[JJackisangry]

That's all very well and good but have you considered reading the parts of my posts where I literally said that Hayes' primary skill was rim protection rather than perimeter D, and that the bigs-out strategy we were using that had Hayes so consistently out of position is the exact same bigs-out strategy that Gentry proclaimed in pre-season that he wanted us to be using? He championed it multiple times in post-practice interviews, in media availabilty, etc. This wasn't a secret, he specifically said multiple times that he wanted us playing a bigs-out system, to be aggressive, and to move away from the drop-scheme we had used in the past.

We should have been using a drop-scheme soon as Favors went out, because Hayes did not have the experience to run the same system Favors had. I pointed it out, Shamit pointed it out in Twitter, others have pointed it out. This was not some mystery to anyone except, apparently, Gentry, who completely failed to make this adjustment until we'd already lost 13 in a row and had Favors back. Gentry had decided on his strategy in the middle of October and it took him until mid-December to make an adjustment. That's not good enough.

It's easy to say ''oh yeah well, of course the D sucked, we were running a strategy we didn't have the personnel for because Favors was out!!!'' and act as if that absolves Gentry, but that completely ignores the fact that it was Gentry's choice to run that strategy in the first place, and he knows precisely what personnel we have. What, did nobody tell him Favors was out? Did he just not know? Come on now.

I hate to use the term strawman because of MM, but he is often full of them.

[msusousaphone]

MM uses "strawman" enough where you'd think JJ would have googled the definition at some point.....

No. I read what Dae wrote about Hayes. And then I wrote, "we had Hayes". One kid. One rookie. And as great as Hayes played individually, he wasn't ready to anchor the defense. After that....we had Jah....Melli....who are you guys dropping back as that rim protector?

And if he should have used a different strategy, again, what strategy would you throw out there when your anchors are a rookie, Jah, and Melli?

[Fedupfan]

They win 4 games and people forget that Gentry is awful. He’s terrible. No way around it. He has 4 winning seasons out of 17. The fact that every season is just like this speaks for itself. It will be a great day when the Pels hire someone who is a known winner.

[JJackisangry]

MM uses "strawman" enough where you'd think JJ would have googled the definition at some point.....

No. I read what Dae wrote about Hayes. And then I wrote, "we had Hayes". One kid. One rookie. And as great as Hayes played individually, he wasn't ready to anchor the defense. After that....we had Jah....Melli....who are you guys dropping back as that rim protector?

And if he should have used a different strategy, again, what strategy would you throw out there when your anchors are a rookie, Jah, and Melli?

Mate you are as disengenuous as they come. And if you simplify the scheme, yes they will fare better. And yes you need to google strawman and reread your own post.

[Pelicanidae]

And if he should have used a different strategy, again, what strategy would you throw out there when your anchors are a rookie, Jah, and Melli?

I will repeat, again. No defense would have been perfect, for the reasons you point out. We did not have any experienced, defensive stalwarts on the team. However, there are plenty of teams in the league with no elite defensive bigs who somehow manage to not have the 27th rated defense in the NBA. The fact that our centre rotation was thin is, alone, not enough to justify a bottom 3 defense, which is what we've been the vast majority of the season.

We should have moved into a drop-scheme, with the big hanging back in the paint, rather than a bigs-out scheme that required Hayes to function as the point of attack defender on ballhandlers on the perimeter. Would that have been perfect? No, it wouldn't. But would it have maximised Hayes' abilities as a rim-protector, while giving him the additional time required to process plays before he became the PoA defender? Yes, it would have.

Would that have been a top 5 defense? No. Because, again, Hayes does not yet have the experience to anchor a defense of that calibre. Would it have been better than 27th, 28th in the league? Yes, I believe it would have been. Would it have been enough to stop us going on a 13 game losing streak? Yes, I think it might have just won us a couple of those games.

[msusousaphone]

I will repeat, again. No defense would have been perfect, for the reasons you point out. We did not have any experienced, defensive stalwarts on the team. However, there are plenty of teams in the league with no elite defensive bigs who somehow manage to not have the 27th rated defense in the NBA. The fact that our centre rotation was thin is, alone, not enough to justify a bottom 3 defense, which is what we've been the vast majority of the season.

We should have moved into a drop-scheme, with the big hanging back in the paint, rather than a bigs-out scheme that required Hayes to function as the point of attack defender on ballhandlers on the perimeter. Would that have been perfect? No, it wouldn't. But would it have maximised Hayes' abilities as a rim-protector, while giving him the additional time required to process plays before he became the PoA defender? Yes, it would have.

Would that have been a top 5 defense? No. Because, again, Hayes does not yet have the experience to anchor a defense of that calibre. Would it have been better than 27th, 28th in the league? Yes, I believe it would have been. Would it have been enough to stop us going on a 13 game losing streak? Yes, I think it might have just won us a couple of those games.

But now we've just gone back full circle.....sure, there are probably a few teams playing better D with no good defensive anchors but I would be willing to wager that those teams have way more experience and continuity than us and probably weren't implementing a new scheme. All of that would have made it chaotic to just say "new scheme!" all of a sudden. Especially when Favors was supposed to be back sooner before his mom passed. Keep in mind we went something like 26 games in a row with someone significant (other than Zion) injured. We can isolate any of those factors and find teams that were close to the Pels on that one factor but I'd wager no team comes anywhere near us when taking it in as a whole.

My "Gentry is coach of the year" is admittedly hyperbole. If you put up some great candidates for new coaches up next to Gentry, I may prefer some of the other candidates. I just don't see a rational argument blaming Gentry as much as he get blamed.

Mate you are as disengenuous as they come. And if you simplify the scheme, yes they will fare better. And yes you need to google strawman and reread your own post.

.....I'll give you that Jah and Melli may fit better as a defensive anchor than your use of 'strawman' and 'disingenuous'.

[JJackisangry]

See, that's my point exactly. You guys say that it's all about rim protection.......but our two main defensive stalwarts were out. That's like saying "we just need to get Voldemort" when Harry Potter isn't around. He's the damn horcrux! Dae even said, "since Favors has been back...." and then goes on to cite how much better things have been since Favors has been back, like that doesn't actually support Gentry. That whole paragraph was essentially saying that he didn't have the necessary pieces to put together a good D.

We had Hayes. He played great for a rookie. But he would constantly get pulled out of position and skip the rim protection. Gentry constantly talked about how guys weren't staying disciplined on D and would get out of position. That was a lot of it. Behind Hayes....we had ZERO rim protectors. So you can't just say that you would simply protect the rim. You would have had no players with the skillset to do that adequately.

It's like, people say Gentry sucks, but when pressed about specifics, they make points that support Gentry not actually sucking, but that the pieces weren't their to make a finished puzzle.

Saying they "conceded" to rim protecting is....just....man....there's clearly a bias there. I think most people without that bias can look at the season and say, "they got Favors back. Now the anchor of that D can help the team rim protect".

Massive strawman here. Favors is obviously not the only part of the puzzle and you know that. We aren’t helping, switching and trying to force turnovers as often. We went the majority of the season running around like headless chickens when the young ones could have played a simpler scheme. Also, you are constantly ignoring this obvious point and yelling “duh Favors” as if the other elements don’t matter. A for effort. You keep being that fake intellectual man.

[Pelicanidae]

My "Gentry is coach of the year" is admittedly hyperbole. If you put up some great candidates for new coaches up next to Gentry, I may prefer some of the other candidates. I just don't see a rational argument blaming Gentry as much as he get blamed.

Gentry gets blamed for coaching problems as much as he does because he gets paid several millions of dollars a year to be the head coach of a basketball team.

When he insists on running despicably bad rotations and lineups, that is his fault. He gets paid to do that. Deciding on the lineups that play and controlling the rotations is a part of his job. So when he plays 4 guards and Melli as his 5 guys on the court for 7 minutes and we get slaughtered, that's his fault. When he plays 3 guards but no lead ball-handlers, that's his decision and it's a bad decision so he gets the blame for that. That's his choice.

When he insists on playing schemes that our players cannot execute, that clearly aren't working, for literally dozens of games at a time, that's his choice. So when we go on the worst losing streak since the franchise changed names, yes, he gets some blame for that right at his feet.

But if he's going to lose, at least he's going to develop youth, right? Well, no. When he insists on keeping NAW glued to the bench for game after game while playing literally every other guard, that's his decision to make, and it's a stupid one. That's his choice. It is his job to make that choice. So yes, he gets the blame for it.

Now, it's very easy for someone to sit at home and criticise, I understand that. And it's very common, whenever someone like me (who is not an NBA coach, obviously) makes comments of this kind, for someone to say that I simply don't understand. I'm not a head coach so I don't see everything he sees, I'm not a genius, I couldn't do it better, whatever.

Maybe that's true, maybe it's not. Maybe I couldn't do better, very possibly that's true. But the thing is, I'm not a Michelin star chef either, but I know when the food is burned.

[msusousaphone]

Massive strawman here. Favors is obviously not the only part of the puzzle and you know that. We aren’t helping, switching and trying to force turnovers as often. We went the majority of the season running around like headless chickens when the young ones could have played a simpler scheme. Also, you are constantly ignoring this obvious point and yelling “duh Favors” as if the other elements don’t matter. A for effort. You keep being that fake intellectual man.

JJ. At some point down the line I stepped on your toes. I'm sorry about that. This place got REALLY toxic last season and I contributed a lot to that with my sassy ****** comments. You called me out. That stuck with me. Since then, I've tried to be less snarky. Tried to come in with the one liners at other posters expenses less...trying for not at all. I relapse some. Overall, I think the board has gotten better. I feel like I've done better. Winning will cure a lot. Me trying to always be positive to other posters will help, too. I like you. I like Dae. I want to be able to have the recourse without the snark. My goal is to make it to where I make the experience of everyone I converse with on here more positive. I forget that sometimes out of frustration. Constant negativity gets to me. But like this young team I will keep trying to be better.

To me, that's not a strawman. People keep making easy generalizations trivializing our issues.....just as a point, you state that we should have changed to a simpler scheme. That's very easy to say. But we had no continuity, no team chemistry, a bunch of very young players, injuries that kept key people out of the first 26 games, and were already implementing a new scheme. To all of the sudden on the fly say "hey guys, hold up. Let's throw in a brand new scheme" would have been impossible. It also would have taken Gentry being a precog in seeing the future injuries he would have to work with. When people say "just have someone drop and rim protect", my point is who? You were willing to accept Melli and Jah there but Dae admitted a bit that they'd suck at it. I have not ignored that the players looked scattered (that would actually be a strawman argument claiming that I did). I just associate it with the learning curve of young players, new team, and new scheme.....plus missing so many people.

I know I screw up sometimes, but I really did take to heart last season when you told me I get too caustic with people. I'm trying.