Five Questions in the Wake of Dunleavy's Resignation
by Steve Perrin on Feb 6, 2010 12:14 AM PST
in News
Email
Print1. Will Kim Hughes be considered for the head coaching job next summer?
The short answer to this one is it depends. If the Clippers play great over the course of the next 33 games, then of course he'll be considered. If they play about the same, or a little better or worse, then probably not. Interim coaches are almost always just that - interim coaches. Kurt Rambis went 24-13 for the Lakers in 1999 - and then waited 11 seasons to get another chance to be a head coach. Talking to club president Andy Roeser today, he seems intent on giving Hughes a chance. Bill Plaschke made an excellent point in his column yesterday - the job is attractive now with a solid core in place and Griffin debuting in nine months. This summer would be an opportune time to go after a high profile coach. But for now, we're in Kim Hughes' audition.
2. Will GM Mike Dunleavy Sr. be looking over Hughes shoulder, breathing down his neck?
3. What will be different with Hughes as coach?Everyone insists that he will not. Dunleavy said flat out that it's Hughes' team now, that the coach has to be in charge, and that he'll only provide input if asked. When a reporter asked Hughes if he would consult with Dunleavy about the game plan against the Spurs tomorrow night he non-chalantly said 'No'. In fact, if people were worried that Dunleavy would have trouble letting go, the Hughes era is getting off to a good start - GMMDsr is away on a scouting trip for the Spurs game and is tied up through All Star break with various things, so he won't even be at Hughes' first several games. Besides, Dunleavy is 6'2" and Hughes is 6'10" - he can't look over his shoulder without a step ladder.
The Clippers will run more. Hughes will call fewer plays from the sideline. These are the things he said today in Playa Vista, and in fac we saw it in a game he coached last season against Denver while MDsr was away from the team. With 12 seconds remaining and the Clippers down one, the Clippers didn't call a time out - almost unheard of in today's NBA, and certainly not a possibility under MDsr. It didn't work out that time as the team ended up settling for a Marcus Camby three and lost the game, but he showed us a lot about his philosophy in that game. He likes to attack defenses before they are set. That means transition, that means fewer play calls, that means a more wide open style. It should be fun.
4. If Dunleavy is really stepping down to focus on GM stuff, can we expect trade activity soon?
In a word, yes. This is a subject for a much longer post, but for now suffice it to say that the Clippers are well aware that they are close, but not quite there, as far as being able to offer a maximum free agent contract to LeBron James in the summer. Would LeBron really consider the Clippers? Maybe not, but he's LeBron James, so if there's even a 1% chance, you have to be in a position to make him that offer, and they get that. It doesn't necessarily mean that there will be a deal by the Feb. 18 deadline. The Clippers could wait until the season's over to make the deals that free up space. But looking at the roster, either Al Thornton or Sebasitan Telfair or both are likely gone before free agency begins on July 1.
5. Will GMMDsr trade Marcus Camby now that he doesn't have to coach the team?
Camby could be traded, but MDsr insists that it's not more likely just because of this move. The conventional wisdom is that the GM thinks long term while the coach thinks short term. The fact is that the Clippers don't have much of a chance at the playoffs, so short term is not a big issue. But neither are they in a hurry to move Camby, since cap space is as valuable to the Clippers as it is to everyone else. I got the distinct impression today that the Clippers are going to hang onto Camby unless someone blows them away with an offer. Look at it this way - if good teams want Camby to help with their playoff run, what are they going to offer? Not a player of value, because that would hurt their playoff run when their motivation is to improve. They could offer picks, but good teams have bad picks. The Clippers aren't trading Marcus Camby for a late first rounder.
36 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What about 2 late 1st rounders?
Or some good teams have the future picks of a bad team (like the Minnesota pick we have). I say we move Camby if we can package AT or Bassy (or both) in the deal.
FA in 2010.
Been meaning to check that...
Utah has New York’s pick. I’d do it for that. But I don’t see that happening. Not sure what else is out there.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Just checked...
No other contenders own good picks. It’s the Jazz or nothing basically.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
I'd take two late rounders
Doing some Spurs like planning with some overseas talent would be a good idea. Effective way of replenishing the talent pool without spending a lot of money (DTS has to love that).
FA in 2010.
If we're going to trade Camby
I’d prefer getting a more proficient wing player at the small forward spot, and if that means we’re packaging Al Thornton as well, I’d say we’d do it.
Think about it...
Are you going to take back salary for that wing player? If so, you’ve just defeated the purpose of trading Thornton.
You have two choices with Camby, as regards incoming salary. (1) Bring back nothing (or practically nothing). Or (2) bring back a star that you feel is almost as good as anything you’d get on the FA market this summer. Anything in between is a non-starter.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Kim Hughes
said himself in an interview that he doesn’t expect to get the full time position next year.
It seems that his expectation is that this is temporary and they’ll look for a new coach in earnest this summer.
Having said that, if the team has a huge turnaround, he’d probably earn the job. I’d say it’s a tall order though. It’d be nice to see.
I didn't see that interview...
But I agree with everything you said. He’s a long shot, as most interim guys are.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
It was in the Yahoo article
It’s a short quote, which I posted in Moki’s fanpost yesterday but things have been crazy lately.
Here it is again from the article:
Asked about his chances of retaining the head-coaching job on a full-time basis, Hughes said, "probably bleak. But it depends on how we play."
I guess he could just be saying it to be humble. I don’t know his personality so I can’t really comment on that.
Thanks...
I actually read that thread after I left the comment hear. It’s an interesting quote from Kim…. maybe not just humble, but also realistic and self-aware.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Exactly
I wonder if DTS even really talked to Hughes before. Maybe you should ask Hughes to describe his relationship with the owner. Anyways back to Hughes, he was handpicked by Dunleavy so its not much of a endorsement to the Clippers brass right now. The team would have to show major major improvement, especially in effort, for Hughes to get the interim tag removed.
FA in 2010.
He was not handpicked by Dunleavy
Actually, Dunleavy went out of his way in a ESPN radio interview to say that he likes all of his coaches and that he simply laid out the pluses and minuses of each coach (including Lucas) to management. Listening to how he said it, I was left with the distinct impression that he wanted Lucas (which makes sense) but that management overruled him. Dunleavy said that the reason management gave was that they were more comfortable with Hughes because he has been with the team longer. But Dunleavy did not handpick Hughes.
What that implies for Hughes’ chances for next season, I have no idea. If anybody else heard that interview and can provide their opinion on what they heard, feel free.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Feb 6, 2010 8:56 AM PST up reply actions
Wow.
That carries a lot more implications than you imply, Son. A GM who does not pick the coach but leaves it to upper management? That doesn’t sound like Dun to me, nor does it sound like a GM who intends to stick around. Hmmm… I don’t think either of those things sound true either, so I’d guess MD’s putting serious spin on this issue.
I think you’re misinterpreting the implications…. or more likely I’m not doing a great job of explaining the subtext of the interview. He “didn’t leave it to upper management.” Upper management effectively overruled him. He can resign in protest and walk away from $5 mil, a decent GM job with a lot of potential opportunity, or he can suck it up, accept the fact the his power is diminished (especially in terms of anything related to coaching), and play nicely in front of the reporters. I think it’s the latter. And yes – I think he was putting a lot of spin on it.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Feb 6, 2010 1:02 PM PST up reply actions
Doesn't that suggest that he
doesn’t have any real power as GM? Why do you think the diminished power is limited to coaching changes?
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Well, I'm certain Steve will get to the bottom of this
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
by Jax on Feb 7, 2010 8:38 PM PST up reply actions
Let's say that the Clippers go 20-13 in the final 33 games.
That would put us at a record of 41-41 or at .500. We’d end the season on a high note and have a potential opportunity that one of our combinations miraculously puts us into a top 3 pick. That’s how it plays out in my dreams.
Back to the question, if we were to somehow finish with a .500 record, do you guys think that Mr. Hughes would be our head coach at the start of next season?
I would love to have a high profile coach, but more importantly, I want a coach that is going to produce wins. The pieces (talented players) should all be in place next season, and the position is ripe for the taking for a coach who is seeking to start a successful run with a new team.
If we can go 20-13...
then yea we probably should keep him. That would be a 60% winning percentage (that would be a 50 win season) and he’d have done it without Blake.
FA in 2010.
A historical example...
In the early 90s, the NY Knicks had Pat Riley and then Don Nelson to coach a very veteran heavy, high priced but very talented team. When Nelson was let go, everyone assumed (and most advocated for) a similarly high priced, high profile coach who could keep the team in line, take them to the next level, etc.
Instead, management went with this short dude who had zero head coaching experience and no brand name recognition whatsoever. Most people thought he had zero gravitas and would be ignored and undermined by Ewing and the other stars on that team. His most notable accomplishment was that he had been a long time assistant to a high profile coach, but that was basically it.
His name was Jeff Van Gundy.
We shouldn’t discount the value of picking the best person for the job – not the most well known.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Feb 6, 2010 9:04 AM PST up reply actions
Absolutely true... but you might also recall...
That JVG had the approval of Patrick Ewing and the other players. He was viewed as a Riley’s guy and was prepared to reinstall a Riley-like accent on defense. He was also a funny little guy who charmed the avaricious NY press corps.
If you go across the river to the NJ Nets a few years later you might find an even better example of an interim coach succeeding. Lawrence Frank, another charming little guy, had the player’s approval after they tired of an autocratic coach who’d worn out his welcome.
I do remember that, and I agree that the buy-in of at least some of the stars was a key reason that he had the opportunity to make it work. I’m just making a more limited point, which is head coaching experience or lots of mentions on ESPN doesn’t have nearly the correlation to future wins and losses that some on this site believe. Familiarity makes people more comfortable out of the gate, but once the pick is made it comes down to wins and losses.
The top choices in the coaching survey on another thread were AJ, JVG and BS. All I’m saying is that notoriety is driving a lot of fan’s votes, and I don’t believe it should. And by the way, all of them (with the possible exception of JVG) are highly structured, defensive minded disciplinarians… which sounds an awful lot like someone else we has recently coached this team.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Feb 6, 2010 1:09 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, agree with all that...
And yes, I see your larger, more limited point. Of those on that list, JVG is probably the best, most-balanced choice. Byron Scott makes no sense given his history with Baron. “The Little General” seems slightly less arrogant with the same overall dilemma. I’d be happy to see the Clips identify a new Lawrence Frank or Erik Spoelstra ie., a name we don’t recognize.
I agree that JVG is the best fit of the trio – I would be proud to call him the Clips coach. But going back to the unknowns, the last thing I want to do (if it were left up to me, of course) is to make a choice that allows everyone to immediately say “same old Clippers.” That drives me crazy. But that said, I guess I’d be willing to endure some short term suffering and taunting (what else is new?) if I had a reasonable gut feeling that the coaching choice really did have the substance to make it over the long haul. Part of that is simply commanding the respect of players, which I think is easier on some teams than others. Yet again, I think our team leaders (Baron, Camby in the short run, BG and EJ in the long run) have a huge role in that. Of those, Baron is really the one who I believe is the most likely candidate to not buy in… but I hope I’m dead wrong on that.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Feb 6, 2010 4:40 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, and I agree about Baron...
In that he is most likely not to buy in with an unproven coach. In light of that, I wonder about his opinion of the choice of Kim Hughes over John Lucas. Honestly, right now, knowing very little, I prefer Hughes, though in the comment above, you seemed to think Dun would have preferred Lucas.
This little thirty game window could only have been offered to one man. They (whoever they are, Roeser and DTS, I suppose), chose Hughes… the less-proven commodity. As the song says, you only get one shot, one moment. It’s very interesting the shot goes to Hughes.
I might be over-thinking it, but perhaps it’s more than just that Hughes has been here longer… perhaps Lucas has too much baggage. He’s had his shot and it’s gone.
Not "avaricious"...
I guess I was thinking “vicious”… wrote “avaricious”… they’re hungry and often mean-spirited, malevolent….
We should all wait and see how well Kim Hughes does
For all we know, Kim Hughes could become our very own Van Gundy, if not better.
I say we see how Telfair and Thornton plays in this new system
Both of them seem like athletic guys who will thrive in a more free flow system than a halfcourt one.
It should be interesting to see how this plays out...
Over the past couple of days, it feels as if a burden has been lifted. However, this doesn’t guarantee anything for the Clippers. I hope that they play spirited basketball under Coach Hughes and make me excited to watch games for the first time since that Laker victory.
Also, it seems to me that most people are operating under the presumption that Dunleavy is going to remain GM until his contract expires, and then leave. Isn’t it possible that he, uhhh, manages (?) his way to an extension. I definitely don’t want this, but if he’s active in the trade market and is able to sign a marquee free agent to go along with the rest of the talent that he’s helped assemble it would appear that that is a possibility.
if the clips don't
play “spirited” ball….if they don’t play defense…if they don’t play to their talent level…the GM will not pay them…..this move didnt just change coaches, it freed up dunleavy to make evaluations on these players, many of whom have expiring contracts….is rasual really worth $3.5 or so million?? i dont think so… ricky davis?? bye bye ricky…camby at $9Mil?? dont think so….thornton?is he worth an extension? at this time no way…craig smith?? he seems to be a keeper….these guys didnt play for dunleavy and money wise, they may end up sorry that they didnt.
I think Camby is worth it
He maybe getting on, but he’s second in the league in rebounding behind Dwight Howard and 6th in blocking.
9:21 LAC - Offensive foul on C. Smith
by LancasterGordon4Eva on Feb 6, 2010 1:47 PM PST up reply actions
i fully extect gmmdsr to put all his efforts
into bringing Lebron to the clips…can you imagine that!!? the guy would look like a genious! Put all his mind/heart into pulling it off…i think dts would give him another 5 yr extension right then and there!
Roger Sterling: To my knees, Don. They're bringing to my knees!"
If he did that I'd be the first to compliment him
Notwithstanding CS’ view
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
prospect and a pick for Camby can get it done
Heard Larry Brown is trying to get rid of DJ Augustin (sp) for a power forward
Bobacts: 2010 first, DJ Augustin,Gerald Henderson, Acie Law and Stephen Graham
for
Clippers: 2011 first and Marcus Camby
Playoff pick for a potential playoff pick and Camby for their playoff push. They unload expiring without touching their core and give up prospects that aren’t playing anyway.
I can assure you that trade will never happen
Augustin and Henderson may not be playing a lot (thank you Larry Brown), but the Bobcats are not going to trade two of their last three 1st round picks and a future first rounder in order to rent Camby for the end of the season. Also, the Bobcats owe their 1st round pick to Denver this season. I believe Denver already traded that pick (to Memphis I believe).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaq digs in on Dwight Howard once again, calling his eventual departure ‘a travesty’
- Behind the locker room doors before and after Lin’s game-winning shot against the Raptors
- Video: Jeremy Lin adds to his legend
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Rick Fox isn’t here for the right reasons
- A shameless businessman wants to trademark “Linsanity”
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
